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

[TGD]

Never joining with bounty campaign have change the rule after bounty ended,

This is the most frustrating move of ICO developers and campaign manager. They announced extra requirements after you already put effort to have stake in their spreadsheet. They do it a month or a week before the Bounty ends. Requirements like downloading their application and putting review so you'll be able to receive rewards with putting deadlines.

[1714661428]

1714661428

[Kotone]

Actually upon launching their campaign they will note some changes so people dont get complained. But this is actually unfair on the part of the participants especially if the projects goes well and increase liquidity on exchanges. Of course their payment will increase too to participants which is likely to be reduced. Life's unfair with these kind of people and dont think the hardship of bounty participants during promotions.

[cryptoknightt]

I think investors understand that when a bounty hunter payment is given in the form of a token or coin it will only make the condition of the price of the coin or token at the place of exchange collapse and there will be many investors who will lose, I think that's the only thing that investors fear from a project.

[BlackFor3st]

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?

It is not against the law of the forum so the project owners and bounty hunters can continue it anytime they like but if you are a clever bounty hunter then you already know that this terms can be use against you anytime.

So if you don't like this kind of terms and you like to avoid taking the risk of this kind of campaign then it's best that you should not join the bounty campaign that includes this kind of terms. But most of the campaigns have this not only to be use against the bounty hunters but for the benefits of the projects and bounty hunters also.

Because sometimes, there are terms that were not included to prevent the spammers so this rule will be applied and there are other useful use to it also.

[Aabcde]

Almost all bounty managers have these rules. I think this is also seen from the development of the project. On the other hand, not too many changes occur when the bounty itself is distributed. If you really don't like these rules, you don't have to follow them. Try searching for bounties through platforms such as bounty0x, bountyhive, etc.

[strunberg]

I think investors understand that when a bounty hunter payment is given in the form of a token or coin it will only make the condition of the price of the coin or token at the place of exchange collapse and there will be many investors who will lose, I think that's the only thing that investors fear from a project.

if developers team give big allocation for bounty hunter , surely investor will afraid with their investment.they spend lot of money to earn profits with high risk.meanwhile get alot without spending their money.investor will claim to developers team about it.protection be their will for it.good projects usually allocate less fund to support in bounty campaign.

[efxtrader]

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?

The bounty manager should be able to provide clear information to bounty participants. But sometimes after the sale period ends, communication between the bounty hunter and the developer team is sometimes interrupted and I think this will worsen the image of the project. Projects that have gotten a bad image from bounty hunters or their investors will certainly not succeed in the market and the price may drop dramatically

[tenakha]

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?

This rule exists in all bounty conditions. It exists for future differences and do not always in negative directions. Sometimes it can even result in an increase in bounty pool.

If you have joined the award, you have already accepted the rules. There is not much we can do to deal with this. Because if any project deceives hunters, the only punishment will be red trust. That is why scam bounties are so many and widespread.

[K4C]

As long as the statement was made at the beginning and bounty hunters still choose to participate, I think it's fair, as much as some criminal project owners has been taking advantage of it, some genuine ones are still sticking to their promises and this is why we do this job, it's a risk but sometimes those risks pays off.

[IvugeoEvolutionCoin]

Its up to you to join and i see other projects adds diclaimer note that they have the right to change the rules or agreement.
Either way bounty is a waste of time now, its better to spend the effort on something else rather than waiting for a long time and get paid for a measly amount.

That's right, some good bounty managers add disclaimers stating that changes can be made in terms and conditions. For instance, if the total supply of the coin is reduced, you don't expect the project to distribute exact amount stated from onset. Also, if the percentage to be distributed depends on the percentage sold out during token sale, it directly affects the total allocation. Well, some projects vehemently refuse to distribute tokens or deliberately reduce rewards, that's the scenario which is unfair.

[nanaimogold]

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?

Two words: greed and dishonesty. It is one undesirable characters you wouldn't want from a developer but unfortunately, most humans are that way. Theses managers and developers are all nice and friendly before and during bounties but once bounty is done and it's time for payment, they will renegade on their promises. I hope that top bounty managers will find a solution to such ugly situations

[Teraboy]

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?

It should not be allowed but the participants have agreed about that and you can't blame the project owner but the participants must be blamed. If the participants join it and it means if the participant is agree with all of the rules that already created by the developers. For me this is unfair consider about the project is not paying with the actual token and there must be a negotiation between the participants and developers.

[kooboat]

It is unfortunate but the sad truth is that when it comes to bounty campaigns, it is like a caste system where bounty hunters are the least among all the ranks. Every bounty campaign comes with it's corresponding terms and conditions of engagement, it is up to you as a bounty hunter whether to join or not.

[EmmanCryp]

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?

I'm always pissed and discouraged when I see that clause too. It gives all the power to the project team and they can decide to reduce bounty rewards.

[Zemomtum]

changes are inevitable and must be included. imagine running a bounty of 10,000,000 total worth of the project token distributed across different social media tasks. Towards the end of the campaign, you realize the participants are fewer than anticipated for. You will be left with no other choice than to reduce the bounty allocation because if not, you will just be given your token for free which will be dump immediately you are able to list it in any exchange which will affect any cadre of investors.

[Zeke_23]

changes are inevitable and must be included. imagine running a bounty of 10,000,000 total worth of the project token distributed across different social media tasks. Towards the end of the campaign, you realize the participants are fewer than anticipated for. You will be left with no other choice than to reduce the bounty allocation because if not, you will just be given your token for free which will be dump immediately you are able to list it in any exchange which will affect any cadre of investors.

It is also stated in bounty campaigns that any changes can happen if the project decided. They can make any adjustment and changes on their own will. Since they are the one who's creating their own policy and regulation. As participating in the campaigns, we should read and understand this circumstance.

[pakdemaco11]

If we don't like to follow the rules set by the manager, you can follow the other bounties. There are many bounties in circulation but it is difficult to choose the one who really pays the bounties. I suggest it is best to follow the bounty by paying btc or token that is already on the market.

[dobolspeed3]

Before participating in a bounty campaign, the main rules must be read. So that in the future there is no mutual blame anymore, because indeed from the beginning the bounty manager and the project have the right to change any rules. If it's not ready, then leave it.

I suggest it is best to follow the bounty by paying btc or token that is already on the market.

Good advice. That is one way that you do not promote the project in vain. But the project makes payments using bitcoin, it is difficult to find. Even now none at all.

[Redemption59]

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?

The ackward moment is after spending tiresome months to complete a bounty, project and bounty managers sit there trying to determine what is good them which goes against hunters, they are always of the view that bounty hunters will dump which will lead the fall of the token or coin price forgetting that only a smaller percentage wa allocated for bounty and so if there is any dump, its either from the team or investors, its high time project managers consider this and stop blaming and denying bounty hunters what is due them.

[fosco333]

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 we see that phrase, we just need to not join that bounty campaigns.
It will be risky, because they can change the rules any time without the agreements from both parties, bounty manager and bounty participants.
That kind of rule is actually very bad, they could reduce the reward at any amount they want, adding kyc requirements, or other things which are not good for hunters.