Stake allocation

[Cheesus]

I think these things are already set. Bigger rank members can wear big signature banner, so they will get high stakes! I don't know which point you are mentioning here, because there is really a big difference between Jr member and Sr, hero members. Big ranks have more experience and they obtain the forum rules perfectly, that's why those accounts are live! You need to agree with these terms. Though It is really very hard to get merits, then I would suggest you, don't be disappointed, try to join other section's campaigns like social, content. Good Luck

[stefany101]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

For me, those higher rank/positions signature hunter deserves to have a high amount of stakes than other hunters, for the reason that they already existed here in bitcoin forum for a long time while others are just new hunters and most of them are just spam accounts by other people. And the signature of the higher ranks are having more characters than on those lower on them.

[Chainsmokers]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

Yes, the current system is different from the previous one and it can be said that it is more difficult for us to increase our rank from junior to senior so we have to work harder to increase our rank. I think a greater stake allocation for a higher rank is natural because most people start from 0 and it takes years to improve it to reach legendary.

[H1N1]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

Hey, do you think the jr member signature performance is same as legendary signature performance ? Of course not.
Legendary account can using color, font size and more space than jr member, the performance will be far different from jr member.
I think it is a very fair system for stake distribution in most signature campaigns.

[AngelOnCrypto]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

A Junior Member makes 15 posts a week and a Hero makes 15 posts a week. You are right.
However, more stakes go for higher ranks, because their signature design is much more flashy and gets much more attention. Hence, better advertisement.

To solve this problem, I have created a detailed comparative signature campaigns spreadsheet, where you can easily compare the stakes structure between the different ranks and different bounty campaigns.
Feel free to check it out in my website.

[Uju4real]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

Well have also noticed that but have come  to understand that those with higher ranks gets more stakes cos they are been regarded as the Pioneers and with that it also gives those with lower ranks to strive more to attain that higher rank

[ataki]

Higher ranks on the forum spent more time on the forum in the past, having  more posts/comments , wearing avatar and they contribute more to the advertising campaign with their accounts than a lower rank. In the  real world you also have  pay more for 100 billboards than for 10 billboards. Some differentiation is needed, is it 100% fair ? It will never be, as how many of us, we have that many opinions on that.

[RareFortune]

In my own opinion the stake allocation has been fare for everyone even with or without the merit system. The participants in signature campaign is getting paid by wearing or advertising the signature of a particular project the more visible the signature is then the more you get paid and it is not all about the post but there are some campaigns that focus on the quality of post and not by ranks though there are few of them.

[Ranly123]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.

So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.

It's only natural that high ranks should have high bounty allocations because their signatures are more visible and emphasized than those below full members. In the case of merit, I found it hard to rank up because of this but it's in the rules so we have to abide by it.

[ameliana]

In my opinion, it is appropriate for higher-ranking members to get a bigger prize because they use a better company brand.
it's just that the comparison is very far from what is done is the same.
so in my opinion, the comparison of the number of stakes doesn't have to be too far.

[spadormie]

More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.

A similar job and performance, yet a higher rank. It's the perks of being on a higher level of rank. And with high ranks, we can put many links on the signature space. That's the difference of being a jr member to a higher member. I get your point but that's the rule of every campaign in this forum. You can't argue with the rules.

[bangjoe]

I agree with that policy and I think this is a fair decision because I think this is one of the efforts made by this forum to reduce account growth that is so significant, merit is like becoming a new standard that will ensure that only qualified members will get merit and go up the rank

[sarul]

Stake allocation for me is kind of unfair because of we have entered the scene of bitcointalk forum the same time sr.members and other legendary enters, we will be sr.members and legendary too. And we work as hard and the same as them that's why I think it is unfair.

For me the stake rule that was created was very fair, because the difference in the appearance of the signature used was according to rank, so the longer your account or the more merit you get, the better the appearance of your signature. Therefore, the distribution of this stake cannot be equated with those with a smaller rank.

[Jackrodwell]

I think the distribution of stakes is usually fair. in the bounty campaigns, most of the tokens of those participants are allocated - the posts of which are the most valuable on the forum. High members are always more influential

Yes it's true because higher rankings are considered more senior and more knowledgeable than Member ranks up, so this is also fair what you say.

For me I dont won't to agree on this as regards higher rank in this forum are old members, for me I think they are enjoying there hard labour as regards stakes alocations.

[altscaner]

for the merit problem, I feel almost the same as you because there are many seniors who give merit to each other but it is very fair in my opinion because the quality of their posts is quite good compared to the new members, for stake issues the system has always been like that so I can't give comment

[doycku]

for the merit problem, I feel almost the same as you because there are many seniors who give merit to each other but it is very fair in my opinion because the quality of their posts is quite good compared to the new members, for stake issues the system has always been like that so I can't give comment

I think that today the situation is almost comparable to the dictatorship and therefore I advise you not to discuss these issues very strongly, as this can harm you directly. If you want to keep your account, then it is better to discuss cryptocurrency, rather than working conditions on the forum.

[GregH37]

i don't think that's a problem, because they have worked hard to increase their rank. and it's normal for them to get paid according to their rank.

you have to work harder to make quality posts so you will get merit. and also you will get the same stake allocation as them if your rank increases like them. so you don't have to complain about this anymore.

Thanks for shedding light to this, I honestly don’t know why people focus more on things they cannot change that work hard to better their own system and life. The time we use in focusing and attacking those who are hardworking and have worked harder to get ranked in position, we would have focused that time in seeing how we can also get ranked.

There are many forum users who are even having sleepless night to become active on this forum in order to get ranked, so if there is any chance for them to get reward for their efforts no matter how high it is, they deserve it, like you said, all we can do too is to be hardworking like them to also get ranked.

[Wale777]

Well the stakes and merit system is not fair and most importantly the merit system which is used to be easy to get and now so hard to get is like changing goal post during a match, though there is always visible means of advertising wearing signature for rank up members than junior members but I think the principle guiding the awarding of merits should be relax to accommodate newbies and members with lower ranks

[pearcy jackson]

The more senior a member is, the more experienced and knowledgeable he is. this is like in the real world. So when he argues in a discussion forum he is expected to be a reference. different from new members, usually considered still amateur and can not be a reference.

[Natalim]

The more senior a member is, the more experienced and knowledgeable he is. this is like in the real world. So when he argues in a discussion forum he is expected to be a reference. different from new members, usually considered still amateur and can not be a reference.

Rank is only based on seniority but it doesn't mean that high rank members are more knowledgeable than the low rank.
Maybe some are more knowledgeable but not all of the high rank, based on how I evaluate myself, I still see that there are low rank that are smarter than me.