Stake vs Fixed bounty allocation

[MbakNarti]

It depends on how much bounty reward amount itself
If the bounty reward amount is low I think I prefer Fixed allocation because you still can get a high amount of bounty reward if the participants are too much.
But
If the bounty reward amount is High I think I prefer Stake allocation because is probably fair and everyone can get their bounty reward depends on their dedication and skill

[ivaf]

The fixed distribution of the bounty reward is more suitable for me. In this case, I can evaluate the possible reward and decide on the advisability of participating in the bounty campaign.

[Menawi12]

With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?

In my opinion it depends on the number of bounty participants. If there are a lot of bounty participants, in my opinion it is more profitable for fixed allocation whereas if there are few bounty campaign participants, in my opinion it is more profitable with a stake allocation system.

[ilhamsugihamin]

I also chose a fixed allocation, as well as in line with your thoughts. the token that I get is clear and I can estimate how many. but for stake there is sometimes news at the end of the distribution about allocations being reduced, this is very often I encounter in the near future.

[foxincoin]

Very few bounty offer fixed amount, and yes i preferred to paid by fixed amount it is better for me, a lot of project failed and received nothing.

[Crypto_lion]

Honestly I would go for a fixed bounty allocation . With stake allocation you are not even sure what you will get and with ranking up in the forum becoming so tough it's getting difficult for member and less to participate in the bounty campaign.

[Bananington]

Fixed bounty allocations are usually preferable because the number of participants do not usually affect the tokens earned by users. The reverse is the case for stake based bounties. The only time where stake based bounty is beneficial is when there are few people who participated in the bounty, since if so many people participate the reward diminishes.

[Darkoth89]

Fixed bounty allocations are usually preferable because the number of participants do not usually affect the tokens earned by users. The reverse is the case for stake based bounties. The only time where stake based bounty is beneficial is when there are few people who participated in the bounty, since if so many people participate the reward diminishes.

You are right, but with a stake based calculation and only a small number of bounty hunters, you have the chance to receive a huge payout. So both have their advantages and for me it depends on the campaign what I like more. If there is a limited number for members of the signature camaign, for example, I'd always prefer a stake base allocation.

[The3max]

Sometimes it decreases by 10-50%, it depends on the number of tokens sold to the market or the amount of money the project has collected from investors. Many bounty programs have reported reducing the amount of bonuses when the work is about to end, which I think is a scam, the bounty hunters have been working continuously for days.

[Pamadar]

Fixed bounty allocations are usually preferable because the number of participants do not usually affect the tokens earned by users. The reverse is the case for stake based bounties. The only time where stake based bounty is beneficial is when there are few people who participated in the bounty, since if so many people participate the reward diminishes.

When there's few participants and the project become successful, stake base will be paid a lot as numbers of stakes will only be parted to those lucky supporters. In the other side, fixed rewards in the short run pay decent as you can see the value basing it on the current status of the coin project.

It still depends from the  participants who's willing to participate in any of the available rewards allocations for bounty projects.

[#Darren]

If a bounty has more than 2000 participants in each campaign, stake based bounties are making no sense anymore, because everybody would get a tiny bit of tokens. In such cases fixed allocation with limited participation is much better.

[jessyj48]

If a bounty has more than 2000 participants in each campaign, stake based bounties are making no sense anymore, because everybody would get a tiny bit of tokens. In such cases fixed allocation with limited participation is much better.

As for me that is not the real case here, all i want is a real project that will pay me for my precious time and hardwork, either staked or fixed bounty allocation i care less about it, all i need is good results from bounties, arguing between fixed and stake won't change anything if all new projects are just scamming and luring bounty hunters

[fortunecrypto]

With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?

I think it is not too different from stake. But I really like to be stakes more because it depends on how hard you work.
Those who do more will be rewarded with more tokens. It seems more fair and motivating for bounty hunters.

I seldom joined fixed allocation, some of the allocation based bounty campaigns I've seen offer small rewards, I prefer stakes based allocation and had good success on this kind of format because of my high rank, plus you are rewarded because of your effort and they will make your stay on the campaign longer.

[acepro]

It depends, because some projects that hold bounties by using stake are mostly not useful even many are scams, and conversely, fixed allocation mostly offers really good projects, of course the rewards are very little according to me, but of course I prefer betting on stake because if we lucky maybe the results will be good.

[cp_underground]

I think both options are good. Fixed distribution guarantees fair pay, but it will always be small. While the stake system pushes you to work more to get more tokens. That is why I like both of these options.

Recently, I have noticed a very popular trend, when Bounty companies do not comply with the terms of the transaction.  After completing a bounty company, participants always receive a lot less reward than promised from the start.  As an example, companies like ADAB, MenaPay, Dabbling and many others can be cited.

many bounty campaign are do it, when bounty ended and with many reason they decreased the value of allocation because they want keep demand on market and bla.bla.bla not like the first rule when the bounty start

[Tylev]

The fixed distribution of a certain number of tokens or other cryptocurrencies is certainly better. In this case, we can calculate in advance our possible earnings and not worry about the number of signatories that joined the campaign later. However, now the ICO team, at its discretion, reduces the pool for any type of distribution. Since very often now they themselves do not adhere to the terms of the contract, any form of payment does not have much significance.
The activities of the ICO need to be regulated by states, without such regulation of the order in the ICO will never exist.

[baigreen]

The fixed distribution of a certain number of tokens or other cryptocurrencies is certainly better. In this case, we can calculate in advance our possible earnings and not worry about the number of signatories that joined the campaign later. However, now the ICO team, at its discretion, reduces the pool for any type of distribution. Since very often now they themselves do not adhere to the terms of the contract, any form of payment does not have much significance.
The activities of the ICO need to be regulated by states, without such regulation of the order in the ICO will never exist.

Each system has its pros and cons. Say for articles or videos I don’t like fixed payouts. Since many admins cross out scammers and there is a chance to earn much more. So I'm a starik not a fixed reward for work.

[bgaf]

With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?

Depends on lots of factor. Let say if fixed allocation isnt worth to do and you know its price based on ICO or IEO you would know until the end youre profit that is nice. But sometime stake allocation can give you more advantage especially if youre joining in a campaign with a high rank account ( I'm talking about signature campaign), you can really takw advantage of this especially the more tokens alloc for high ranks. Fixed tokens isnt bad but if fixed payment, Id rather join to btc or eth payment terms.

[juperos]

With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?

No, I still think calculating stakes would be a wise choice. because it will make the most of a project's pool, and divide it up for the most active people.
For weekly token projects, if the participants exceed the threshold, they will have management problems.
So stakes would be a better idea.

[lighpulsar07]

If a bounty has more than 2000 participants in each campaign, stake based bounties are making no sense anymore, because everybody would get a tiny bit of tokens. In such cases fixed allocation with limited participation is much better.

I don't think that is possible since 2000 people in a single bounty campaign since the manager had to limit the campaign in order make payouts more reasonable for bounty hunters and also properly manage the camapign and besides i don't see any ICO/IEO campaign here on bitcointalk holding a 2000 or more partcipants and if so, the trusted dts and moderators would have notice it and shutdown it