Bounties with limitations pays higher rewards

[andrearz]

The bounty wouldn't really limit the number that could participate in their campaign ,
Because they need more people for publicity and to promote their campaign to attract investors.
But the limitations would really affect the bounty rewards but that doesn't mean that you could earn more from their campaign,
Remember that not all of the campaign would pay and not all of them would have a value in the market so even with the limitations for participants wouldn't guarantee a thing.

yes, I agree with you because with so many participants the possibility of an ICO being known by investors is getting higher, and of course it also encourages keywords in google to find their ICO. in my opinion the number of participants is a very strategic.

[1714502737]

1714502737

[1714502737]

1714502737

[1714502737]

1714502737

[1714502737]

1714502737

[Eildosa]

It's the truth. The project requires high-quality content and a large number of people he does not need. After all, the most important thing is quality, not quantity.

[veraro]

Restrictions and limitations for participation in a bounty campaigns is good for bounty hunters, but it dont have benefits for projects. Projects prefer as much as possible bounty hunters promote their company because the sum of rewards don't change no matter how much participants. So bounty hunters should make their decisions is it worth to join such campaigns and get in the end 2-3$ or not.

[jessyj48]

For some it is and for others its not, for me I think its makes lotta sense to have restrictions or limited participants for bounties so that the bounty promoters can have enough rewards for there work

[rosezionjohn]

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

Back in 2017, I use to see many campaigns do this. I guess things took a turn when the bear market arrived and the interest of ICO investors declined. Bounty manager started accepting unlimited participants for more exposure and to reach more potential investors.  

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

This is usually the case. I seldom see campaigns allowing hunters with less than 100 followers/friends to join.

[Bitbtc8]

I remember promoting a bounty in the past with 100 limited participants for various campaigns and guess what? The rewards are so pleasing ,I was able to make up to 3eth from the bounty alone ,it think it makes sense if bounties that actually start limiting bounty promoters so that those who promote the project can get reasonable payouts

[dark08]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

Limitating the bounty participant is a good move to get higher reward  because the number of person to share the bounty pool has a limit number but look at ico bounty this day most of them have no real intension to create product and in the end its turning to scam project its really hard to find a good project.
I remember the popularity of ico project way back 2017 most of the project have been successfully and get a good profit compare the current situation of ico that gives a small portion of reward.

[cryp24x]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

These are some alternative ways to get a higher payout if there is a huge amount of rewards for the bounty. Limitations was an effective way for higher quality work from the bounty hunters but it will also limit the spread of the news especially when it terms to be a social media account. It is up to the project manager or the Bounty Manager what they value that much. Quality or Quantity. I suggest that it would be better if they will meet on some point that will not sacrifice the quality. Get a team that will really have the time and commitment to check the quality of the posts.

[niisarearning]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

Bounties are made for marketing as more people join there will be more mouth of word marketing or people start to market in youtube, blog or bitcointalk about this project . Following bounty no more profitable .

[bgaf]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

This should be the case for all bounty. I like the way some bounty manager restrict the participants to this so the bounty payment wouldnt be diluted by many participants which sometime have been cheated as long as the campaign is easy.

Much better to have a strict acceptance on some bounty participant's work o only those who are deserving will be rewarded. Would a legit project should pay? Spammer, multi account? I dont think so. I like Parodium handling his campaign and only rewarded quality work plus the participants are limited and have strict requirement for all.

[proTECH77]

Never thought of this before and even though it like that, you must do due diligence in-respect to the Bounty campaign in order to avoid be scam or scam project. The last i did a checked, it was never done base on limitation, be placed before the bounty will pay higher, but each Bounties have their ways in this aspect.

[r32godzilla]

But think about it, why they should limit number of participants? More participants will do more work for the company than less participants.

[Lagonda]

Generally, OP's arguments show true and I do prefer bounties with limited numbers of participants. However, there are still some projects with no limits but pay good rewards. Actually, limitations are set by bounty managers. A good and experienced manager usually take care of this. Like someone said above, Parodium is a good manager with limitations and quality campaigns.

[fosco333]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

It will depends on the bounty manager how clever he will find some rules to manage the campaign.
However, as a bounty hunter, one should not joining campaign just because the reward is higher than others.
The important thing is, the project is real and will paying hunters once they succeed.

[AgentZero23]

I have seen bounty campaigns with limit of participants and the rewards will be high. Some bounty managers don't limit the participants and the payout will be low and waste of time. I appreciate the bounty managers who have the sentiment of protecting the bounty hunters and have the payout they deserve.

[Pamadar]

But think about it, why they should limit number of participants? More participants will do more work for the company than less participants.

That's the point, they wanted to have more participants in order to reached out more potential investors, if your point is to have much higher rewards then it will only benefits the bounty but not exactly the project to get more investors to be involved, there's a positive but also negative sides of this statement.

[semobo]

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS

The limitations can be done in two ways:

1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.

Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign

2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.

Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.

Having limited participants is good thing which can avoid spam on their project and also will equally beneficial for everyone participating on it by their tasks but paying based on their followers count is unfair because bith done same task but one gets higher while other one receive less rewards .

[Landak]

the more bounty participants, usually the more investors.
HYPE !! woaah, many bounty hunters join in project X, because a lot of enthusiasm will make investors more interested.

if there are fewer bounty participants, it means that no investor will want to invest because the lack of trust can be seen from the number of bounty participants.

even at its limits, but does not reduce the number of bounty/scam projects. actually, the number of bounty participants is not a problem, if the project is indeed good, surely from the total prize pool of 1% of total sales, it will not affect the stability of prices on the market. if it really affects, that means the project is weak and does not have a bright future.

[dizzy1996]

I think this is a good solution for participants of bounty companies as the pool for rewards will be divided between a limited number of participants and the quality of the content will be improved, which will accordingly improve the marketing of this project.

[EdenDice]

Most of the bounties are doesn't care about the hunter's payment. They do only care about how many people are promoting their project. I don't think this is a good way to catch investors or to raise quality contents. They should care quality over the quantity. I do agree with you that bounty should have limitations in participation and that will be helpful for the hunter and for the projects as well!