Bounties with limitations pays higher rewards

[xysheeh03]

I think the bounty restrictions and limitations only intended for enough allocation to be given to participants, not the amount that's got to be a higer rewards. Even less participants still it can have also lesa rewards if the rewards tokens has a low value amount.

[efrenbilantok]

That mostly happens, it is bacause they are calculating their allocation carefully according to certain amount of participants to enjoy their reward, but no matter how high the reward is, if the value of the coin or token is very low then its not really a high reward.

[john alex young]

During my involvement in bounties, I saw - / + 40% of projects implementing participant restrictions in each campaign. Programs like this are good to implement to maximize gifts and other things we don't want. I hope, programs like this can be 100%.

[mardaed]

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.

I agree on this restriction and i feel its a will give a better benefits on every bounty hunter but in order for the project to get known in the public that there should be  no limitation on participants. More participants in bounty is more the project get known in public and more investors to come.

[Iykecollins]

It is relative but when comparing to all paying bounties it is pays more, at least there won't be need for having worked for some months with your junior or memeber rank for some months all of a sudden a lot of persons with the hero or legendary memeber rank will participate for two weeks and pack all the stakes and token.

[VDraci]

Yes this is so true and it means there won't be too much dumpers too since the participants are limited but many bounties don't care about reducing participants I think that's why most projects coins lose value too quick

[ven7net]

I believe that the limitations of which are written above affect payments, but not always effectively. For me, however, there remains such a formula: the maximum pool for payments + a minimum of participants. In this case, you can get the maximum reward, well, if only admins want to pay so much. Last time, if the earnings are really big, they take it and cut it down. In my practice, there have already been several such bounty. When asked why? Answer - you have earned too much, it should not be so. So only luck can help in this matter.

[sidkz]

I met such restrictions, but such companies still do not gain this number.
Be careful fraudsters can use this method too.

[Raymondavid47]

This is very true. In fact I love any Bounty that actually have max number of people that can join a particular campaign. This way each participants is sure to earn a good amount of reward. For example bountyhive, bounties on bountyhive as restrictions on the number of people that can join and that's makes every participant to be adequately rewarded. Too many crowd in a campaign only leads to people earning peanuts.

[robelneo]

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 really will result in good rewards I remember participating in one campaign, where there is no limit of participants and this is a signature campaign and I am already with a legendary account, I end up getting $50 worth of their token, there is no spreadsheet but the number of participants is over 300 bounty manager should really limit the participants.

[Cactushrt]

If there is capped on participants yes i can say you can get a better rewards but allocation is the most important for higher bounty

[baiwei]

Maybe because the bounty that locks a limited participants wants to make sure that the bounty hunters who promote the project will be benefited well as they will work harder for the promoting they do so i must choose project that locks a limited and high allocation in bounty campaigns.

[aderidwan98]

I strongly agree with this idea, because at least a baounty hunter pays one of them because of the many participants who register, and it's not effective in my opinion

[ifykiki]

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.

I know you don't mean that bounties without limitations pay less because I do a lot of bounties without limitation and some of them pay very well. What I get from this post is that, bounties with limitations have better chances of paying higher rewards. I agree though, bounties like utrum was incredible

[OptimusPrime_3]

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.

yes you are partially right although this does not include all bounties with limitations. But I have know quite some bounties which has placed limitations and the payment was quite good.

[siorapokk]

For sure, the more limitations, the harder it is to get through and to get your reward. Especially, when the team requires a KYC process as well, so the more you need to do, the bigger your rewards are going to be.

[10BTCaDay]

For sure, the more limitations, the harder it is to get through and to get your reward. Especially, when the team requires a KYC process as well, so the more you need to do, the bigger your rewards are going to be.

But as a rule, getting into such companies is also very difficult, so you need to constantly monitor the beginning of new projects on the forum.

[Prolifik]

We all know about this problem. But that is problem for bounty hunters, not for managers and ICO teams.
They need as many participants as possible. More participants = bigger influence on social media sites.

[salink]

We all know about this problem. But that is problem for bounty hunters, not for managers and ICO teams.
They need as many participants as possible. More participants = bigger influence on social media sites.

you're right. The team spent some money and of course wanted their project to spread as much as possible, which was beneficial for their project but it was a nightmare for bounty hunters. I support limiting the number of people participating in campaigns, getting tired of only getting a few dollars after a few months.

[Zdraste16]

In companies with a limited number of participants, payments may be higher.  Performing such an award is an opportunity to calculate your award, since the total number of tokens allocated by the project is divided into a limited number of participants.