Why do Investors always turn to reduce or deny bounty hunters their payments

[dcomomal]

If you are joining the bounty campaign, you automatically agree with those statements, and it is right, managers and team members are allowed to implement KYC and change rules whenever they like. It would destroy their image, but they are allowed to do so.

[103deltafox]

We've been into bounties for a some time, once we see such disclaimer it is up to us to go into the bounty or not, if at the end it gets adjusted, we just have to take it in good fate because it was already stated. So I think it is good to do research and find a good project that will suit you including the reward but for disclaimer nothing can be done.

[SummerBliss]

Some Project owners together with some Bounty managers promise Hunters certain percentage of total tokens to be created.
These promised tokens inturn manipulates hunters to engage in these bounties expecting to be paid.
One main phrase that gets to favor this bounty managers and project owners is "bounty manager and project owners have the rigjt to male changes to the bounty tool at any point in time"
Should the above statement be allowed to continue?

See its the case with many bounty campaigns that they make changes at the time of payment but we cant say anything about it as they have already mentioned that that have rights to make changes in the agreement.Its upto you that you want to participate or not.They make changes to avoid problems like dump situation or any other issue.Make your own decision before joining.

[ecnalubma]

All terms are just promises and also meant to be broken, some changes or adjustments are normal if the amount collected by the projects are low. My advise is don't expect too much about bounties. Even if you are paid with the right amount you can't be sure that you can sell your tokens at good prices.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Some Project owners together with some Bounty managers promise Hunters certain percentage of total tokens to be created.
These promised tokens inturn manipulates hunters to engage in these bounties expecting to be paid.
One main phrase that gets to favor this bounty managers and project owners is "bounty manager and project owners have the rigjt to male changes to the bounty tool at any point in time"
Should the above statement be allowed to continue?

Well... this condition ("bounty manager and project owners have the right to male changes to the bounty tool at any point in time") is extremely unfair to the bounty hunters and I don't know why it is being allowed here in Bitcointalk. I have seen the campaign managers misusing this condition very frequently. Sometimes they make KYC mandatory in the end, after not mentioning about it in the beginning. And sometimes, they extend the duration of the campaign, without increasing the bounty pool proportionately.

[libert19]

We can't really do much when that phrase is wrote in guidelines, if you don't like that, don't join that particular bounty.

[bobelr]

Some Project owners together with some Bounty managers promise Hunters certain percentage of total tokens to be created.
These promised tokens inturn manipulates hunters to engage in these bounties expecting to be paid.
One main phrase that gets to favor this bounty managers and project owners is "bounty manager and project owners have the rigjt to male changes to the bounty tool at any point in time"
Should the above statement be allowed to continue?

If not allowed to continue, how do you intend to make change to it?

[Beparanf]

Some uses those lines if theirs only few participants that are joining, so they can decrease the amount allocated for certain campaigns like social media, content or signatures. Some didn't reach certain numbers that needs to be transfer in other campaign types and some add rules , so it's their safest line whenever they wanted to change rules since they put it for their first launch.

[jessyj48]

Some Project owners together with some Bounty managers promise Hunters certain percentage of total tokens to be created.
These promised tokens inturn manipulates hunters to engage in these bounties expecting to be paid.
One main phrase that gets to favor this bounty managers and project owners is "bounty manager and project owners have the rigjt to male changes to the bounty tool at any point in time"
Should the above statement be allowed to continue?

There is rampant manipulation in the bounty section actually. That should not be allowed for me. That is a form of cheating. If there are changes, it should be made at least a month before the bounty ends and not in a day or two. I have seen bounty campaigns whose allocation are suddenly changed even when the campaign is already finished. There are also others that change the duration into more than triple the time without any additional reward. These are all forms of cheating. Nobody should participate in such cheaters.

Presently XCard project added extra 3 weeks to their bounty campaign but they never add more to the bounty allocation, i guess this is example of what you are referring to, well this doesn't mean i should stop promoting and if the project become successful it might favour in the end

[cryptoangel]

We can't really do much when that phrase is wrote in guidelines, if you don't like that, don't join that particular bounty.

They don't know how to pick the right projects so they trying to others opinion, I think must we read the OP post and pick the trusted projects. If you don't like to share your opinion just skip this thread, Bounty is important in crypto environment those are have good knowledge they always survive on long term.

[Bitbtc8]

Its really hard to detect which bounty projects will pay you after bounty ends, even projects or coins that are already trading on exchanges since last year failed to pay bounty hunters, e.g quarkchain and xblock refused to pay me my rewards, i think what remains now it how lucky you are

[electronicash]

it happens every now and then that after the bounty campaign, all the rules are then in favor to the team because they can decide whatever they want to do. if the bounty hunters just unite to ask for real coin instead like BTC instead of the created tokens, the team of scam will finally see that all the people who promotes them can't just be their toys.  i have participated to some of this campaign and was waiting whether the team will really do what they promise. some team are just not that honest.

[watergold]

Sometimes they make KYC mandatory in the end, after not mentioning about it in the beginning. And sometimes, they extend the duration of the campaign, without increasing the bounty pool proportionately.

Yes, I often see bounties like that, for example Mycro Jobs at the beginning of the bounty was launched. They did not say that following the bounty, they had to do KYC, but after the bounty ended up to 1 year, the manager said that he had to do KYC to make sure when the distribution was right on target. disappointed that the allocation of prizes was cut even though the campaign was extended.

[Rodeo02]

Sometimes they make KYC mandatory in the end, after not mentioning about it in the beginning. And sometimes, they extend the duration of the campaign, without increasing the bounty pool proportionately.

Yes, I often see bounties like that, for example Mycro Jobs at the beginning of the bounty was launched. They did not say that following the bounty, they had to do KYC, but after the bounty ended up to 1 year, the manager said that he had to do KYC to make sure when the distribution was right on target. disappointed that the allocation of prizes was cut even though the campaign was extended.

They should add allocated funds for the bounty for extra promotion they do for extending the campaign not reducing it and adding a rules with KYC. They are making it difficult for promoters to claim thier payment .

[Pearls Before Swine]

Why not?
Changes are expected when we are doing something and to prevent an unnecessary problem such as complaints, it is important for the managers to make that statement.

That's all fine and dandy, but the problem is the project owners are starting to make changes like requiring kyc right at the end or reducing the payout to the bounty hunters...again, right at the end, after they've done all the advertising for the project.  It's a statement that is being abused and it isn't fair to the bounty hunters.

Yes, I often see bounties like that, for example Mycro Jobs at the beginning of the bounty was launched. They did not say that following the bounty, they had to do KYC

And that's just one of a few examples I've seen of this.  If the project can give a disclaimer like 'we reserve the right to change X' then at least they should be very clear about kyc requirements and state that the payment is fixed and not change it.

Until bounty hunters start standing up for themselves, this abuse will continue.  It's good that op started a thread to address the issue.

[reza7777]

Every decisions make by the project teams will be passed onto bounty hunters by bounty managers, most times bounty allocation get reduced because the project failed to reach its target hardcap, if they pay bounty hunters when the project failed to met target it will be a total loss for the team, remember that bounty hunters like to dump, just think about it

Bounty allocation should be not reduced because at the first time the bounty manager made a thread, there are a contract that how many percont of total supply that allocated to bounty.

But in reality, there are so many bounties that change rules in middle of bounty or when bounty ends, with reasons that sometimes make no sense and bounty manager will not have authority if team has decided

[HodlerKing101]

I have seen this phrase many times in the bounty threads, but it did not stop me from participating in the bounty campaign, because this is not the main criterion for participation for me. I study the prospects of the entire project before participating.

Many bounty hunters failed to understand that there are many things to consider when promoting projects, developers are humans too, they need funds to be able to pay hunters for their hardwork as well, once project failed to me softcap there will be problem

That's the thing, these projects will stop their bounty/airdrop campaigns if they ever feel that they won't get near their softcap at all. I've seen a lot of projects do that and in result, will piss of the bounty hunters because all their efforts to promote the campaign will be put to waste. DAO Maker is doing social mining which lets you work for crypto in exchange of helping the project grow, plus they're doing it for well-funded projects like ONE.

But for the bounty campaigns that suddenly stops, I hope that there will be a way for us to secure bounty tokens, similar to how tokens are secured on IEO's for investors.

[yulchatar]

Yes, in many campaigns such a moment is registered. Of course, it’s not very pleasant when the terms and conditions change unexpectedly and without any good reason. But in many agreements and documents in our ordinary life there is a "small print" in which indicated possible changes, and which usually no one reads at all.

[crazy-pilot]

Bounty managers and project owners have every right to change conditions due to some reasons, but abuse should not be allowed. I think that only bad projects abuse this right.

[tanjiran]

Yes, in many campaigns such a moment is registered. Of course, it’s not very pleasant when the terms and conditions change unexpectedly and without any good reason. But in many agreements and documents in our ordinary life there is a "small print" in which indicated possible changes, and which usually no one reads at all.

Actually, if the project is really promising and responsible, it will not change the rules arbitrarily and harm the bounty hunter. But sometimes this unfavorable market situation makes all expectations change. Some of them have failed in reaching the target, so fundraising is extended, usually it also has an impact on the duration of the bounty. So, accept all this gracefully.