Why arent REPUTABLE signature campaign managers merit sources by default?

[Findingnemo]

I believed in what  @suchmoon says, those campaign managers(paying btc per week, not altcoins)can do apply merit source if they want just what as other merit sources do. If they aren't busy managing campaign they can easily spot users had a good post and deserving to be merited. But that is another workload for them, they can't handle(checking participants posts is not easy), let our merit sources do their works and that's their responsibility.

Why not bounty managers? Anyone in this forum has the right to apply to be a merit source and the theymos is the only person who can decide whether that person is worthy to be a merit source or not,not that type of bounty he was managing.

[1714776296]

1714776296

[1714776296]

1714776296

[1714776296]

1714776296

[LoyceV]

I think there is a possible conflict of interest, and therefore campaign managers should not be merit sources.

I don't see how that would be a conflict of interest: the campaign manager doesn't get anything out of meriting those posts.
I once read all posts made by ChipMixer participants in 2 weeks, I sent somewhere around 200 Merit to those posts. If a campaign manager takes the time to actually check the posts, it's very little additional effort to also Merit the posts that are worth it.

Why not bounty managers?

Can you show me a bounty campaign that doesn't encourage spam? I don't think it exists, because a campaign won't get any exposure on the spam-infested altcoin boards if it doesn't join the spammers.

[Findingnemo]

Why not bounty managers?

Can you show me a bounty campaign that doesn't encourage spam? I don't think it exists, because a campaign won't get any exposure on the spam-infested altcoin boards if it doesn't join the spammers.

But I don't think the approval of merit source based on what kind of campaign they were in or managing it.

As along as they meet the criteria requirement to be one.But its not deniable that altcoin board was filled with useless shit posts.

[freedomgo]

Everyone who like to be a source has to follow the procedure, which is to apply.

Reputable signature campaign manager can also apply if they want and there is no exemption here, no such thing as automatic as we are all guided by rules of the forum.

[Quickseller]

I think there is a possible conflict of interest, and therefore campaign managers should not be merit sources.

I don't see how that would be a conflict of interest: the campaign manager doesn't get anything out of meriting those posts.

The conflict is that it allows the campaign manager to point out that the people *they* choose to be in their campaigns have and are receiving a lot of merit, and therefore should be hired to manage additional campaigns. 

[DarkStar_]

I think there is a possible conflict of interest, and therefore campaign managers should not be merit sources.

I don't see how that would be a conflict of interest: the campaign manager doesn't get anything out of meriting those posts.

The conflict is that it allows the campaign manager to point out that the people *they* choose to be in their campaigns have and are receiving a lot of merit, and therefore should be hired to manage additional campaigns. 

That's not great reasoning to pick a manager over another. The more you pay, the better participants you can get. Nothing else to it.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

You can look at it from this angle, the managers get to read a selective set of users posts week by week so their style of posting can subconsciously get registered as a quality form of writing in their mind (taking into consideration we're what we read).

Let me make a point with this, as a merit source appointed for your local baord you intentionally or subconsciously send more merit to participate of your local board, same fate might occur if campaign managers are made sources by default. Currently the few mangers who're sources aren't pressured to merit their participants so they don't review their posts history with a mindset of meriting them but when managers get to be sources by default, that mindset of meriting their participants come into the picture because that was why they were made sources which might affect their judgement just as it affects some merit sources appointed to local boards.