IS IT A SIGN OF FAILURE OR Scam?

[joseyphil82]

I have seen series of signature bounty campaigns that make their payments in bitcoin and ethereum for people of high ranks in the forum to wear their signature code, avatar and personal text.
These people of high ranks are sometimes seen by the newbies as the experts who can only or mostly campaign for projects with great potentials. The project teams seems to also believe this to the point that they pay them in bitcoin or ethereum in believe that those high rank members wearing their signature codes will attract investors for them.
Some of these projects end up being a waste of investors' funds and times.
Now my point is, if the high rank signature hunters really believe a cryptocurrency project will be success, why don't they accept it as payment? Does it mean they already foresee that the token will end up being a shit in the end?

KONOIS (KON) token is an example of such projects

Getting paid in btc after bounty ends has nothing to do with the failure or success of any project and infact it safe very few projects from dumping value on exchanges, this is another way of controlling or avoiding dumps after the buying back technique, in fact i prefer getting paid in btc because surely i will sell after payment receive to buy other altcoin

[lolak2]

i think they do not want to take this risk and need to get paid in stable coin , this is fair, no one can guarantee the coin success.

[Chuky92]

With these reasons stated by you, I don't think it's tangible enough to grade a project either failure or scam. Ever since inception, it is the team or developers that always decides what to pay participants not the other way round. I have seen a project thats paid in USDT because they are yet to mint their own coin thus also using that avenue to maintain their platform, I think that project is Probit exchange, if am not mistaken. In addition, the success of any project greatly depends on the team because bounty hunters only helps to spread the word about the project while it's left for the team to fulfill what they promised.

[Tahdayi]

i think they do not want to take this risk and need to get paid in stable coin , this is fair, no one can guarantee the coin success.

There are bounty types , but the truth behind them have a very small amount of 2-3 dollars 3-4 weeks , if you rank legendary then of course you will pay about 80-100 $ a week.

[baeva2]

When choosing a project to participate, any bounty hunter would prefer a project that pays with Ethereum or Bitcoin, rather than with unknown tokens. But payment in eth and btc cannot guarantee that the project will not be fraudulent. The participation of senior ranks of bounty hunters also cannot guarantee the success of the project.

[tippytoes]

With these reasons stated by you, I don't think it's tangible enough to grade a project either failure or scam. Ever since inception, it is the team or developers that always decides what to pay participants not the other way round. I have seen a project thats paid in USDT because they are yet to mint their own coin thus also using that avenue to maintain their platform, I think that project is Probit exchange, if am not mistaken. In addition, the success of any project greatly depends on the team because bounty hunters only helps to spread the word about the project while it's left for the team to fulfill what they promised.

What more can I say? It is the bounty hunter's prerogative if he will join in a btc or eth-paying campaign or token paying campaigns. Bounty hunters are not the major contributor in the fate of a project. They actually have minimal impact as it entirely depends on the team handling the project. Hunters are just trying to expand the horizon of the platform by promoting them in various forms like the sig campaign and social media promotions.

[sandra_x]

It takes some level of significant contribution and time to achieve higher ranks in the forum.The choice of payments in bitcoin or ethereum is a matter of preference as they are readily tradable to other tokens, instead of waiting endlessly for tokens to he listed. Also, not all failed projects are scams,some simply were launched when the market was not ready for it and as such failed

[Teawhalee]

It’s not about having high rank that make them to be paid on bitcoin or ETH ! Even low ranked individuals are also paid in bitcoin . It all depends on what the project team wants to offer as reward ! Either it’s their nature token or bitcoin and ETH payment !

[retnoanjani]

snip~
Now my point is, if the high rank signature hunters really believe a cryptocurrency project will be success, why don't they accept it as payment? Does it mean they already foresee that the token will end up being a shit in the end?

It can't be concluded that way either. BTC and ETH already have power in the market, bounty hunters tend to choose it because of the guarantee that the reward they will get is more valuable. Whereas rewards in the form of tokens from a project have two possibilities: if the project is good and is accepted by the market, the price will increase, on the contrary, the reward obtained is not worth the work if the market acceptance is not optimal. Remember friends, cryptocurrency is full of unpredictable things, it could be a token that is considered worthless instead of a pump.

[poornamelessme]

It's not a sign of either. If anything, it means the campaign team at least has some money to start with, as otherwise they couldn't pay out in btc or eth.

But it's not a sign of being a failure or scam regardless. Folks who do campaigns for btc or eth simply want a guaranteed payout. And devs figure they can get better participants that way.

Whether the project is good or not isn't really related. I have done token bounties in the past ... ages ago they could be very profitable, some paid out more than 1BTC each. Nowadays most are just be happy to get anything at all. I've also done some previous bounties where the campaigns closed up shop early and didn't give participants any coins. So from a participant standpoint, getting coins with a set value and guaranteed is a much safer way to go.

[samcrypto]

Signature hunters wanted to received bitcoin as payment because that’s already a profit for them and they want to be sure that they get the right payment but it doesn’t mean that the project is a failure or a scam. Many signature campaign succeed even if they paid using bitcoin so I believe if the team is making a good coin they will succeed.

[kawetsriyanto]

Not at all, most projects that pay the members of signature bounty participants are commonly successful. and they are commonly the coins that have been already used for the real use case. Basically, it is not about the coin of them to be paid for the participants. It is about the appreciation for the selected participants to get the rewards on BTC or ETH because they will be more interested, but it doesn't mean that the coins are scams. I have joined this kind of signature campaign and mostly they are successful. And to be one of the selected participants of those signature campaigns with ETH and BTC payment, we must compete highly, the rule and regulations are more strict, and only the qualified members are chosen.

[glendall]

what you mentioned are only estimates and assumptions, one example is not enough to be saple in conducting research and making conclusions,
payment with BTC or ETH will have many enthusiasts because it is rare, and also no need to wait to enter the market to sell it because it is already registered in many places.
so in my opinion it's natural and there's nothing wrong.

[tanjiran]

what you mentioned are only estimates and assumptions, one example is not enough to be saple in conducting research and making conclusions,
payment with BTC or ETH will have many enthusiasts because it is rare, and also no need to wait to enter the market to sell it because it is already registered in many places.
so in my opinion it's natural and there's nothing wrong.

Yes, you are right. Bounty that gives a BTC or ETH reward is not a sign that the token of the project is worthless. It could be that as one strategy to attract the interest of bounty hunters to join them. It can also be a strategy to collect quality bounty hunters on binding conditions.

[ethereumhunter]

what you mentioned are only estimates and assumptions, one example is not enough to be saple in conducting research and making conclusions,
payment with BTC or ETH will have many enthusiasts because it is rare, and also no need to wait to enter the market to sell it because it is already registered in many places.
so in my opinion it's natural and there's nothing wrong.

Yes, you are right. Bounty that gives a BTC or ETH reward is not a sign that the token of the project is worthless. It could be that as one strategy to attract the interest of bounty hunters to join them. It can also be a strategy to collect quality bounty hunters on binding conditions.

And the strategy is working good to the participants, and many of us already join in the campaign. It will help the project to reach their goals in the future because they want to get as many people as they can from the campaign. Besides that, I think that will not be the sign if the project will be a scam because the scam will only happen if the project doesn't pay the participants or there is something wrong inside the project.

[coinswebid]

what you mentioned are only estimates and assumptions, one example is not enough to be saple in conducting research and making conclusions,
payment with BTC or ETH will have many enthusiasts because it is rare, and also no need to wait to enter the market to sell it because it is already registered in many places.
so in my opinion it's natural and there's nothing wrong.

Yes, you are right. Bounty that gives a BTC or ETH reward is not a sign that the token of the project is worthless. It could be that as one strategy to attract the interest of bounty hunters to join them. It can also be a strategy to collect quality bounty hunters on binding conditions.

a bounty project that gives bitcoin or ethereum as the reward is a big sign if the project has enough fund from the beginning
and not all new project has enough money from the beginning my friend,

[libert19]

if the high rank signature hunters really believe a cryptocurrency project will be success, why don't they accept it as payment? Does it mean they already foresee that the token will end up being a shit in the end?

They promote for the sake of promotion. Wearing signature does not mean they themselves believe in it.

Celebrities endorse plethora of brands, that doesn't mean they personally use it.

It's end user who need to do due diligence.

Regarding payment in BTC/ETH vs token, established currencies usually get more attention since they are bound to have value, and which way to pay is decided by project not the hunters/promoters.

[#Darren]

Bounties that are paying in ETH, BTC or in stable coin have a huge advantage in front of those that are paying with their own tokens. When this token goes live, nobody would be able to dump the price, so in my opinion it is a very smart decision.

[adzino]

I have seen series of signature bounty campaigns that make their payments in bitcoin and ethereum for people of high ranks in the forum to wear their signature code, avatar and personal text.
These people of high ranks are sometimes seen by the newbies as the experts who can only or mostly campaign for projects with great potentials. The project teams seems to also believe this to the point that they pay them in bitcoin or ethereum in believe that those high rank members wearing their signature codes will attract investors for them.
Some of these projects end up being a waste of investors' funds and times.
Now my point is, if the high rank signature hunters really believe a cryptocurrency project will be success, why don't they accept it as payment? Does it mean they already foresee that the token will end up being a shit in the end?

KONOIS (KON) token is an example of such projects

Compare the signature worn by a newbiew or junior member, with the one worn by higher rank people. They are totally different. Hence they get paid more. Higher rank signatures tend to attract more user attention, while lower rank signature easily gets ignored or missed with the posts. The would be totally stupid to pay all the rank the same payment.
Everyone prefers to get paid in BTC or ETH rather than getting paid in tokens. The advertise for the project. The project being successful or not is none of their business unfortunately.

[Red-Apple]

actually it is because the high rank members have been around longer so they have more experience. these users know that the shitcoin these developers want to pay them in is worthless and a lot of hassle to dump for something valuable like bitcoin or fiat. so they will never join these shitcoin campaigns unless they are paid in bitcoin which is why they have to pay them in bitcoin otherwise they can only get newbies to advertise for them.
and no THIS is not t he sign of failure or scam. the project itself being shitty and useless is the sign of it being a failure and scam.