Overview of Bitcointalk Signature Anti-Spam Campaign Managers

[LoyceV]

I think listing figures like hundreds of bitcoins could easily mislead or confuse people. Probably should be listed in fiat as well for the reasons I mentioned before.

Mentioning amounts in dollars just doesn't sound right on a Bitcoin forum. May I suggest using an image, where you set the amount in dollars, and it shows Bitcoins. Example: $1000=.
The down side is that it gives weird looking amounts, but it's updated on each reload.

My 5 Bitcoin total was an estimate summing up my portfolio. I can't get an exact amount of how much I've held at once either, as several funds (0.1, 0.65 and 1.25) were overlapping. I think a concervative estimage would be 1.5 BTC in December 2016, worth around $1350 back then. Looking further on my portfolio, to my surprise 0.28518 Bitcoin escrowed in November 2017 was worth more ($2012.89) when I received it, and is currently worth . Full disclosure: I'm still holding funds for something else than a campaign.

The maximum number of participants probably needs clarification too, it now ranges from 20 to 4k+. I assume 20 is for signature campaigns and 4k+ for social media.

[1714112043]

1714112043

[1714112043]

1714112043

[1714112043]

1714112043

[1714112043]

1714112043

[hilariousetc]

I think listing figures like hundreds of bitcoins could easily mislead or confuse people. Probably should be listed in fiat as well for the reasons I mentioned before.

Mentioning amounts in dollars just doesn't sound right on a Bitcoin forum. May I suggest using an image, where you set the amount in dollars, and it shows Bitcoins. Example: $1000=.
The down side is that it gives weird looking amounts, but it's updated on each reload.

But that isn't an accurate representation either especially if you never held that amount in bitcoin. Not everything has to be denominated in bitcoin either, especially when the value fluctuates so much and that's why a fiat value gives a much better and accurate representation and why it should be represented here. If you held £10k in bitcoins then it's the £10k that is the pertinent figure and that's what others should be judging you on.

[yahoo62278]

Thread looks great and if I am a company looking for advertisement I would use almost any member on this list and feel safe.

The only problem I have with the list is the "Amount Escrowed" column. As stated when I was asked to give you my info, alot of managers pay campaigns themselves. They're not really escrows. Maybe rename the column "Amount of bitcoin held at 1 time"?

The number of 100-200 bitcoin is correct for me as far as bitcoin paid out to users, but incorrect as far as amount held at 1 time. 30-35 bitcoin would be the correct amount I held at 1 time and that number is due to me managing multiple campaigns at once. I would have to go back and look at the bitcoin price at those times to see what the USD amount would be but not going to do so unless requested.


Anyways great job with the thread and to any company looking for a manager, this is a great list to find 1 on.

The maximum number of participants probably needs clarification too, it now ranges from 20 to 4k+. I assume 20 is for signature campaigns and 4k+ for social media.

I suspect the same thing as well. Irfan runs alot of stuff through his bounty portals and most likely that's a social media total. My biggest signature campaign was 200 members at 1 time but I could handle any amount which is why I used unlimited as my answer.

[digaran]

Nice to see that the usual cartel members are present here as always. now we know why people want to get into DT list, they want the trust. therefore they are farming trust.
Note that receiving positive trust from DT members after making some deals with them is equal to trust farming. their ratings are visible by default.
Note again that I think 1 person shouldn't manage an unlimited number of participants unless they are superman.

[Quickseller]

I would suggest removing the amount escrowed all together.

IMO, most people who represent how much they have escrowed do so in a misleading way, one way or another.

The value of coins varies so much that it is difficult to measure the value of a trade if the coins were held for even a week or so, which is not unusual. As h&c mentioned, holding 1 bitcoin 100 times is very different than holding 100 btc once, and holding one btc two years ago is different than holding a coin today.

Also, holding tokens on behalf of the issuer is borderline dishonest that there is even escrow because it would be trivial for the issuer to effectively void the specific tokens.

[pixie85]

I think listing figures like hundreds of bitcoins could easily mislead or confuse people. Probably should be listed in fiat as well for the reasons I mentioned before.

Mentioning amounts in dollars just doesn't sound right on a Bitcoin forum. May I suggest using an image, where you set the amount in dollars, and it shows Bitcoins. Example: $1000=.
The down side is that it gives weird looking amounts, but it's updated on each reload.

But that isn't an accurate representation either especially if you never held that amount in bitcoin. Not everything has to be denominated in bitcoin either, especially when the value fluctuates so much and that's why a fiat value gives a much better and accurate representation and why it should be represented here. If you held £10k in bitcoins then it's the £10k that is the pertinent figure and that's what others should be judging you on.

This is a Bitcoin forum, not a fiat forum. If someone is being mislead by prices being given in Bitcoin, or feels mislead by it, should not call himself a bitcoin enthusiast and either educate himself so that he no longer feels mislead, or look for another hobby.
Saying that paying 100 Bitcoin at any point in time isn't an accurate representation is like saying that stealing 100 in 2016 is not a smaller crime than stealing the same amount in 2017. If you hold a certain number of bitcoins, you hold a certain number of bitcoins.

[InvoKing]

This is a Bitcoin forum, not a fiat forum. If someone is being mislead by prices being given in Bitcoin, or feels mislead by it, should not call himself a bitcoin enthusiast and either educate himself so that he no longer feels mislead, or look for another hobby.

What you said is true and it was already said by the people you quoted hundreds of time, so don't think that they aren't aware of this.
You didn't pay attention about the main reason why this topic was created. In fact theymos called for it essentially for external investors who don't have forum accounts and who may deal with other coins in addition to BTC, that's why an email was added for example.

[LTU_btc]

Great job, pugman. But I think that you forgot to add some managers like Sylon and jamalaezaz. Ok, I'm just kidding. Good that you listed only most professional and most trusted signature managers and you didn't added some random bounty managers. I think soon you may get messages "Why I'm not on your list?"
And I didn't knew that OgNasty is also sig. campaign manager. I thought that he is only escrow agent.

[pugman]

Didn't notice that. He may just be copying Mitchel's thread, but did you get permission from theymos to advertise there as you need to get the go-ahead from an admin to do that and it's rarely granted?

I have sent theymos a PM,let's see.

Three bitcoins is over $20,000. You can't see why someone would just keep that for themselves? There have been campaign managers and escrows that have or have tried to scam for much less. There are several users on the list who I have no reason to trust with such an amount, but that again is why the most held at once is a much better indicator here.

Agreed. I'll be sending a PM to all the managers and will update it once I start getting responses.

Mentioning amounts in dollars just doesn't sound right on a Bitcoin forum. May I suggest using an image, where you set the amount in dollars, and it shows Bitcoins. Example: $1000=.
The down side is that it gives weird looking amounts, but it's updated on each reload.

My 5 Bitcoin total was an estimate summing up my portfolio. I can't get an exact amount of how much I've held at once either, as several funds (0.1, 0.65 and 1.25) were overlapping. I think a concervative estimage would be 1.5 BTC in December 2016, worth around $1350 back then. Looking further on my portfolio, to my surprise 0.28518 Bitcoin escrowed in November 2017 was worth more ($2012.89) when I received it, and is currently worth . Full disclosure: I'm still holding funds for something else than a campaign.

The maximum number of participants probably needs clarification too, it now ranges from 20 to 4k+. I assume 20 is for signature campaigns and 4k+ for social media.

I actually think dollars would be better. I'll probably mention like, "Maximum amount of bitcoins held at one time: 100,000$ worth of BTC".
The number of participants,is not that big of a deal,I expect people to hire like maximum 200 participants per campaign. Beyond that,it will be way too crazy for the company itself, and for the manager,it'd become really hard. And they would also need to shell out a shitload of money for that. I don't think anyone would do that,they would rather hire 20 people and make it a long term campaign,but I may be wrong. There are some crazy people out there.

Thread looks great and if I am a company looking for advertisement I would use almost any member on this list and feel safe.

The only problem I have with the list is the "Amount Escrowed" column. As stated when I was asked to give you my info, alot of managers pay campaigns themselves. They're not really escrows. Maybe rename the column "Amount of bitcoin held at 1 time"?

The number of 100-200 bitcoin is correct for me as far as bitcoin paid out to users, but incorrect as far as amount held at 1 time. 30-35 bitcoin would be the correct amount I held at 1 time and that number is due to me managing multiple campaigns at once. I would have to go back and look at the bitcoin price at those times to see what the USD amount would be but not going to do so unless requested.


Anyways great job with the thread and to any company looking for a manager, this is a great list to find 1 on.

The maximum number of participants probably needs clarification too, it now ranges from 20 to 4k+. I assume 20 is for signature campaigns and 4k+ for social media.

I suspect the same thing as well. Irfan runs alot of stuff through his bounty portals and most likely that's a social media total. My biggest signature campaign was 200 members at 1 time but I could handle any amount which is why I used unlimited as my answer.

Thank you for your kind words. I will be changing the "Amount Escrowed" column in some time.

Nice to see that the usual cartel members are present here as always. now we know why people want to get into DT list, they want the trust. therefore they are farming trust.
Note that receiving positive trust from DT members after making some deals with them is equal to trust farming. their ratings are visible by default.
Note again that I think 1 person shouldn't manage an unlimited number of participants unless they are superman.

I was wondering where you disappeared. Only one cartel member(actmyname) and the Don is there on the list though. Uh-oh. actmyname=marboroza=suchmoon==Don Hilary?

Note that receiving positive trust from DT members after making some deals with them is equal to trust farming. their ratings are visible by default.

So you're saying the whole point of trust-system is useless? Receiving positive trust==trust farming? And receiving negative trust==abuse? Damn you're a retard. Are you still pissed that I didn't add you? Again,don't take it personally. It is only because you have no experience at all in managing campaigns.

I would suggest removing the amount escrowed all together.

IMO, most people who represent how much they have escrowed do so in a misleading way, one way or another.

The value of coins varies so much that it is difficult to measure the value of a trade if the coins were held for even a week or so, which is not unusual. As h&c mentioned, holding 1 bitcoin 100 times is very different than holding 100 btc once, and holding one btc two years ago is different than holding a coin today.

Also, holding tokens on behalf of the issuer is borderline dishonest that there is even escrow because it would be trivial for the issuer to effectively void the specific tokens.

I am changing that entire column.

This is a Bitcoin forum, not a fiat forum. If someone is being mislead by prices being given in Bitcoin, or feels mislead by it, should not call himself a bitcoin enthusiast and either educate himself so that he no longer feels mislead, or look for another hobby.
Saying that paying 100 Bitcoin at any point in time isn't an accurate representation is like saying that stealing 100 in 2016 is not a smaller crime than stealing the same amount in 2017. If you hold a certain number of bitcoins, you hold a certain number of bitcoins.

Yet we have an alternative crypto-currency board/s(local boards have it too). Everyone compares bitcoin in terms of dollars,its nothing new. And it would be better in dollars because people who are new to this stuff may misunderstand because 10BTC a few years ago was worth like 5,000$ and now it is worth 75,000$.

Great job, pugman. But I think that you forgot to add some managers like Sylon and jamalaezaz. Ok, I'm just kidding. Good that you listed only most professional and most trusted signature managers and you didn't added some random bounty managers. I think soon you may get messages "Why I'm not on your list?"
And I didn't knew that OgNasty is also sig. campaign manager. I thought that he is only escrow agent.

Thank you for your kind words. If managers haven't been added on the list,they know exactly why and I don't need to make it more clearer to them,although I already did. Even I didn't know much about OgNasty managing campaigns but I have come to know about it since a couple of days ago.
Edit: I forgot to ask,user shahzadafzal sent me a Pm to make this thread look much clearer, I don't know if I like it or not,so I want the community's opinion .

Example:

|

Manager

|

Contact

|

Past Work

|

Mode of Payment

|

Max. No. of participants per campaign

|

ANN thread

|

SMAS list

|

Amount Escrowed

|

No. of campaigns managed

|

Default Trust

|

|

actmyname

|

|

N/A

|

Bitcoin and Altcoins

|

Unlimited

|

|

N/A

|

0.4 BTC

|

N/A

|

27:-0/+4

|

[TryNinja]

|

Manager

|

Contact

|

Past Work

|

Mode of Payment

|

Max. No. of participants per campaign

|

ANN thread

|

SMAS list

|

Amount Escrowed

|

No. of campaigns managed

|

Default Trust

|

|

actmyname

|

|

N/A

|

Bitcoin and Altcoins

|

Unlimited

|

|

N/A

|

0.4 BTC

|

N/A

|

27:-0/+4

|

I thought about this aswell.

Pros:
- Much cleaner and slick.
- The whole "contact" column doesn't take 2 lines anymore.

Cons:
- Icons disappearing if the image proxy goes down (like today).

Overall, I agree with these changes. Maybe change the last icon to Telegram's icon.

[shahzadafzal]

Overall, I agree with these changes. Maybe change the last icon to Telegram's icon.

Well I tried to use same images as in https://bitcointalk.org itself, hoping that it won't go to proxyserver e.g. https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/bbc/email.gif
But I guess it's still going through proxy server even with relative URL e.g. /Themes/custom1/images/bbc/email.gif

By the way this is telegram just an old one https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/bbc/tele.gif. (Again used this because don't not want to upload new images)

[TryNinja]

Well I tried to use same images as in https://bitcointalk.org itself, hoping that it won't go to proxyserver e.g. https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/bbc/email.gif
But I guess it's still going through proxy server even with relative URL e.g. /Themes/custom1/images/bbc/email.gif

By the way this is telegram just an old one https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/bbc/tele.gif. (Again used this because don't not want to upload new images)

I imagined this was the reason. It still goes through the proxyserver tho (looks like every image a user posts goes through it). Right click the URL in the table above, select "Copy image URL" and you will see.

[Hhampuz]

As there's much talk about the escrowed amount (I have a feeling some shots are coming my way). I gave the $100k estimated over the time of me managing campaigns which has been over the last 6-8months or so.

I have however done escrows for more than that, I did two Satori Group Buys, one in December last year and one in January this year. The latest one was the largest where I held, and paid for the total order, over $170,000. I did not want to add that as I didn't see it was related to my managing services. But getting unsure now what people are getting at, if trust is the main focus then I guess escrowed deals such as that one is worth mentioning?

EDIT; Great job on the thread so far and it's nice to see you are open to any and all suggestions pugman. Really appreciate the time you spend on it!

[actmyname]

I suggest this kind of change instead (brevity is best):

|

Username

|

Contact

|

Past Work

|

Mode of Payment

|

Max # Participants

|

ANN thread

|

SMAS list

|

Max Escrowed

|

# campaigns managed

|

Default Trust

|

|

actmyname

|

|

-

|

BTC/Alts

|

Unlimited

|

|

-

|

0.4 BTC

|

-

|

27:-0/+4

|

*changed the table headings and some of the data.

[digaran]

So you're saying the whole point of trust-system is useless? Receiving positive trust==trust farming? And receiving negative trust==abuse? Damn you're a retard.

I know that when I talk about things that you don't like I would be the retard, let me dumb it down. dealing with DT members in hopes of receiving positive trust is farming trust. since people have several alt accounts, they could also give their own accounts positive trust or better yet if they have a DT1 account, they could add their own alt accounts on DT2. leaving positive trust with no reference is equal to scamming. let me explain why. imagine a DT1-2 member has left positive trust on people with no reference, so far everything is OK, we could say that we should trust that DT1-2 member, then a DT2 member would tag somebody red just because that DT2 member is a bully and the same DT1-2 member whom we were trusting before wouldn't give a fuck about the actions of that bully DT2 member. that means DT1-2 member is no longer trusted and nobody should trust his/her positive feedbacks with no reference. why?

Because that DT1-2 member doesn't care about others and would only want us to trust his/her words. that is untrustworthy behavior and anybody acting that way should not be trusted.

[SFR10]

I actually think dollars would be better. I'll probably mention like, "Maximum amount of bitcoins held at one time: 100,000$ worth of BTC".

Much better but you'll be using a lot of words for the heading part (try "Max Amount Held" instead).

• For the equivalent amount part (100,000$ worth of BTC), make sure to link its transaction ID to blockchain.info explorer (so advertisers could hover over the amount and see the exact worth at that time).
  
  • Not sure if there's another explorer with that functionality.
  • In case someone held certain amount across multiple transactions, just use (ex. 100,000$ worth of BTC [1, 2 and 3]).

I suggest this kind of change instead (brevity is best):

|

Username

|

Contact

|

Past Work

|

Mode of Payment

|

Max # Participants

|

ANN thread

|

SMAS list

|

Max Escrowed

|

# campaigns managed

|

Default Trust

|

|

actmyname

|

|

-

|

BTC/Alts

|

Unlimited

|

|

-

|

0.4 BTC

|

-

|

27:-0/+4

|

*changed the table headings and some of the data.

I like it but if you view it by any resolution lower than 1600 x 900, it appears distorted:

• We can combine three columns (Past Work, ANN thread and # campaigns managed) into one (ANN Thread).
  
  • Everyone should have their own announcement threads (mandatory).

• There's no point in having "SMAS list" column (for the advertisers) as well.

|

Username

|

Contact

|

Mode of Payment

|

Max # Participants

|

ANN thread

|

Max Amount Held

|

Default Trust

|

|

actmyname

|

|

BTC/Alts

|

Unlimited

|

|

0.4 BTC

|

27:-0/+4

|

* Distortion starts on resolutions lower than 1152 x 864.

[hilariousetc]

There should probably be a distinction between campaign managers and also escrows. Not all campaign managers are escrows nor should all of them be defacto trusted to be one. Maybe the value should be removed all together especially as people might just start using it to base who is most trustworthy or not.

This is a Bitcoin forum, not a fiat forum. If someone is being mislead by prices being given in Bitcoin, or feels mislead by it, should not call himself a bitcoin enthusiast and either educate himself so that he no longer feels mislead, or look for another hobby.

This is very silly reasoning. This is a bitcoin forum but bitcoins have a fiat value attached to them and that is incredibly relevant due to the nature of bitcoin. Fiat isn't a naughty word nobody should ever utter here. If somebody has claimed to have been trusted with 100 bitcoins at once 6 years ago or 100 bitcoins over their lifetime then those are both two very different things and values today. It would be incredibly misleading if the only figure they had to go on was a bitcoin one and to claim someone isn't a 'bitcoin enthusiast' because of that is both ridiculous and completely irrelevant. Bitcoin isn't the only crypto that is transacted in here either. Most campaigns pay in alts or crapcoin tokens so there needs to be some unanimity

Saying that paying 100 Bitcoin at any point in time isn't an accurate representation is like saying that stealing 100 in 2016 is not a smaller crime than stealing the same amount in 2017.

Again, completely irrelevant, but stealing 1 million dollars isn't the same as stealing a dollar, is it? Whoops, used fiat again.

If you hold a certain number of bitcoins, you hold a certain number of bitcoins.

Yeah, and when you held them is incredibly important because there's a fiat value attached to those coins which is very relevant. If the value of them was ten cents total at the time then that should be stipulated, and that's why the worth of them at the time is a much more important and accurate representation of the value you can be trusted with.

"You can trust me with 100 bitcoins" - 2010
"You can trust me with 100 bitcoins" - 2018

You're saying those are the same and no distinction should be made? I guess I should abandon all logic and find a new hobby, eh?

[LoyceV]

I like it, the layout is better when it's less wide.
I've changed one thing in your quote: I've added alt-text:

Code:

[img alt=Email]
[img alt=PM]
[img alt=Telegram]

This way, if the image doesn't load, it shows a text hyperlink.

In case someone held certain amount across multiple transactions, just use (ex. 100,000$ worth of BTC [1, 2 and 3]).

If you start showing txids, you'll need a signed message to prove it was owned by the campaign manager too. Many of the campaigns I've managed for Rollin.io were off-chain. I had full access to the funds, but without a chain record.

I like it but if you view it by any resolution lower than 1600 x 900, it appears distorted:

Changing long phrases from font size 10 to 9 helps a bit.
Leave out the "#": Max # Participants > Max Participants.

dealing with DT members in hopes of receiving positive trust is farming trust.

This isn't the place for accusations, please open yet another thread in Reputation.

[ICOMain.io]

Reserved. Thank you for listing the best bounty manager. I frequently saw some of the names are mentioned in other topics and all say that they are the very good and prfofessional. Just out of my curiosity, a bounty manager can handle how many ICO one time? Cos a bounty program nomally last around 8 weeks. 

[Lauda]

Just out of my curiosity, a bounty manager can handle how many ICO one time? Cos a bounty program nomally last around 8 weeks.  

Impossible to accurately say, but each should be able to handle several at once. Anyhow, a lot of the BMs are proxies that forward their work to the cheapest bidder.