Question for fellow Campaign Managers

[apoorvlathey]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

[LoyceMobile]

Why wouldn't it be okay? As a campaign manager, you're hired by a company to do a job, if overqualified people are willing to accept a lower pay: fine by me!

I once turned a few low ranking slots into one high ranking slot. That could be an option too.

[logfiles]

Sorry am no campaign manager but i just wanted to share my thought

Look at it this way, If you were looking a few small advertising firms to do the job for you with in the means of your small budget and then due to high competition some great firms with much better exposure also apply for the same contract accepting the same pay regardless. Would you turn them away because you initially had smaller firms in mind?

The same applies to signature campaigns. Yes, there are a few low ranked quality posters but most high ranked accounts are a result of quality posting especially after the introduction of the merit system.
On top of that they get to don a much more large and colorful signature as compared to that of low ranked account for the same rate.

[bitmover]

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

I am not a campaign manager, but I think there is no problem, I see so many people doing this.

I am in a Sr. member spot in my currently signature campaign. I think I make a good job, I do make some quality posts and I think this is a win-win for both me and the campaign manager and the company who is paying for the advertising.

[judeafante]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

I never managed a campaign, but I will speak as a participant and this is just a recommendation, in choosing between a high rank member and low rank member, the best qualification is the posting history and style of posting, both rank will show the signature so why not pick the applicant with the most credible resume and who has the a good reputation in the forum.

[DarkStar_]

I personally would accept the higher ranked member if they had better posts than the lower ranked applicants, but I would not choose a lower quality higher ranked member over higher quality lower ranked member. I can also see the argument for the other side as higher ranks are able to wear flashier signatures that might be better for advertising.

Either of those options are fine. I wouldn't decline overqualified applications just because they're overqualified though, similar to what Loyce said.

[timerland]

I'm not a campaign manager myself, but I would be assuming most managers would be following a format similar to this. That's what I've been seeing.

1. Trust (eg, no red-rated accounts or accounts that have just woken up after inactivity)
2. Post quality/merit history
3. Rank

So, basically, I've seen managers accept higher ranked accounts for lower payment options if their posts are of equal or of better quality of the lower ranked accounts.

[Taskford]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

Just stick to your rules and don't let those high rank members to go down since it's an act of greediness, they should wait there category to open before they can apply since the one will hit on that matters is on correct rank which are seeking the perfect opportunity time.

If you accept the higher rank to go lower down then it can possibly creates a conflict of interest and it will stain the current good flow of signature campaigns.

[Anonylz]

It is their request and they are okey with it, so I think you should honor it, although it seem a bit degrading for especially a Hero Member to put in such request, I can understand for full member but for Hero, it doesn't feel right, but it is individual choices, otherwise, they can always wait for a spot in their rank to be vacant to apply.

[Ridwan Fauzi]

Usually, the higher rank when they are willing to fill low rank spot it is just for temporaly. They will get out when there is new signature campaign appear, expect if you just fill the rank in accordance with what you need most possiblity they will keep to promote your project although there is new signature campaign appear. Which is mean, you have to ready to open new spot when they left which will make you work again to find new participants.

However, the higher rank and he is a good poster will make your project goes well. I mean the people who sees his signature will obviously curious to open it and most possibility if the project that you promoted is feasible to their want then the will help to the project (with the other say they will be your investor). You can choose as you wanted, and of course it will make consideration for you.

[milewilda]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

All things would depend into your decision since you are the campaign manager. You're the boss and all things which you preferred wouldnt be considered as wrong thing because you are the ones being appointed to manage it up. If you do saw that there were no low ranks qualified with your standards then its your choice to choose up higher ranks and no one can oppose with that.

[dothebeats]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

I've seen yahoo did this countless of times with some of the campaigns he managed/manages. Literally there isn't any reason to bar them from joining your campaign if they fit the criteria really well and that they deliver good posts for the benefit of the service you guys are trying to advertise here in the forum. It's like you're getting better (not all of the time anyways) quality with less budget, and I think that's a win-win for the service trying to get their name out in the open.

[DarkDays]

Since you are calling yourself a signature manager, then you should have the ability to enforce your choice with diction to every member that's applying to be a part of such a campaign. As a manager, you set the rules, it is your show, don't spoil your value by asking such things which undermine your own authority. If you want to do it, then by all means do it. But make sure you provide a justification. Don't be a pussy.

I personally believe you can put anybody in any slot you want, so long as their value justifies it. There are some members that produce better visibility than hero members, while some Legendary members are so trash they only deserve a member pay grade.

[Findingnemo]

but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

You are in complete control of picking participants to your campaign so yes you can if you want and there is no option to choose from.But my suggestion will be only go with high ranked members if you can't be able to find the right participants at the required rank level.

And also campaign managers need to decide different quality requirements for different rank levels which is supposed to be higher for high rank member since they were here longer.

[coin-investor]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

I once applied for a much lower rank just last year but the manager prefers a lower than a hero rank I just realized that when it comes to hiring a participants bounty manager always pick, the one that can follow rules and who can grasp the topic and post wisely and within the topic  I was a lousy poster then but that's a good motivation for me, managers will always go for good posters than rank because they want to protect the reputation of the campaign more than anything else.  

[adroitful_one]

Recently, I was managing a signature campaign and there were few slots open just for the Member ranks, but many higher-level users like Full Member and Hero were requesting me to consider their applications and they would be satisfied with the lower pay according to the Member rank.

Is it acceptable to put higher-level users in competition with lower ones for a spot in the signature campaign?
I declined to address such requests, but what if I don't get any applications from good quality posters for the member spot is it then right to choose from higher accounts?

Would really like to hear what you do with your campaigns in such a scenario.

I've only been in a couple(Mainly because I was in the NitrogenSports campaign for like 2 years), but what they did there was put the higher ranking users in as member ranks at that pay grade and gave them first dibs on a spot in the higher pay/higher ranking spots if one opened. If there's a higher ranking member that wants in and is a quality poster, I don't see any reason to not give them the member slot if they're fine with the pay rate.

[elda34b]

If there's a higher ranking member that wants in and is a quality poster, I don't see any reason to not give them the member slot if they're fine with the pay rate.

One of the possible reasons is that it will decrease the chance for lower-ranked members to participate in a campaign. But most managers won't do this if there is no good poster on that specific rank.

I once applied for a much lower rank just last year but the manager prefers a lower than a hero rank I just realized that when it comes to hiring a participants bounty manager always pick, the one that can follow rules and who can grasp the topic and post wisely and within the topic

It's obvious that Full Member with 200 earned merits is way better than a Sr. Member with no earned merits and most of the time only post 1 line garbage.

[sheenshane]

First, let me share my opinion even if I did not experience to manage a signature campaign or as a manager.
As I noticed, it will depend upon on situation. If the spot is for lower rank and the application of participants was not qualified and there is high rank ready to take a lower rank and have a quality post, then, why not.

The queries of OP is will depend on a case to case basis.

16. I solely reserve the right to remove participants, disqualify posts and changing rules or pay rates.

Just like the rules that implement by Coolcryptovator, you have the right since you are a campaign manager and that is a part of your job to check quality posters and who is the right to choose as long as the applicants willing to take lower rank by their willingness.

[apoorvlathey]

I didn't do this earlier, because I thought I might get backlash from smaller ranks.
Now I got it, knowing views from campaign managers as well as participants. Would be giving the spot, in my next campaign, to the ones that actually qualify according to their quality.