Red trust accounts wearing signature.....

[desticy]

The main problem is that the red trust accounts for the most part belong to multi accounts, which means that taking on such accounts,
the manager runs the risk of launching all multi-accounts associated with a particular account in the company.

This is normal if the rules do not prohibit the use of multiple accounts by one owner, but I have not seen such a permit in any company.

[1714900949]

1714900949

[1714900949]

1714900949

[1714900949]

1714900949

[1714900949]

1714900949

[1714900949]

1714900949

[fuguebtc]

What impression you are giving if someone with red trust is carrying your project signature? Definatly a bad image. Bounty manager need to be careful while designing the policy, so that red entries are not carrying your signature. A small mistake can turn out to be disastrous.

[desticy]

What impression you are giving if someone with red trust is carrying your project signature? Definatly a bad image. Bounty manager need to be careful while designing the policy, so that red entries are not carrying your signature. A small mistake can turn out to be disastrous.

It is not necessary that the impression will be bad. It is important for project developers to advertise a project by any means.
The more often the project signature will appear on the forum pages, the better, the more people will see it, and the more potential investors will come to the project.

But only on condition that the owners of accounts with a negative trust will not be abusers who write shit posts and spam.

[Ailmand]

It is the bounty manager and the team's decision if they will allow users with red trust to join signature campaigns. And it doesn't directly reflect how hood or bad a manager is. Some projects doesn't care about the participants post or trust, what they care about the traffic and # of participants who will promote for their project.

[lienfaye]

It is the bounty manager and the team's decision if they will allow users with red trust to join signature campaigns. And it doesn't directly reflect how hood or bad a manager is. Some projects doesn't care about the participants post or trust, what they care about the traffic and # of participants who will promote for their project.

Indeed, it totally depends on the rules of the team and the manager.

What matters to them is to get a number of participants who will advertise their project regardless if the bounty hunters has a red trust or not.

I think if the team has no problem having a participant with red trust then its fine. This doesnt reflect the manager's reputation because they are just following the instruction of the team.

[SanZoldyck]

every bounty manager always has a different set of rules, so in my opinion that's normal, and the bounty manager has the right to have strict rules should not accept redtrust accounts

[xvids]

every bounty manager always has a different set of rules, so in my opinion that's normal, and the bounty manager has the right to have strict rules should not accept redtrust accounts

Exactly some of the bounty managers are accepting negative trust user because they want more participants to promote the project,
While others have limited spot in order for their participants to receive a good amount of reward.
But accepting negative trust user doesn't really mean that the project is bad or something.

[imutlinda]

every bounty manager always has a different set of rules, so in my opinion that's normal, and the bounty manager has the right to have strict rules should not accept redtrust accounts

it depends on managers because they have different rules that they have. so I think it's also normal for that as long as it doesn't violate the rules that have been made, if allowed then it's a separate policy from the bounty manager

[Xxmodded]

Red trust account only con joined campaign where allowed for red trust participant bounty, maybe many bounties campaign have stop for accepting red trust account but you can find little campaign allowed red trust participants, you can get back your account from red trust by helping from moderator of bitcointalk.

[plast555]

I don't see any harm in this case.
Because redtrust is not always taken for the same reason. Sometimes you get redtrust if you are defeated in the bureaucracy inside bitcointalk.
This does not mean that the user is unreliable but only shows that he was defeated in bitcointalk's politics.
That's why everyone in the forum has a say.
Besides, Donald Trump's use of Iphone does not harm Iphone's brand value.

[desticy]

I don't see any harm in this case.
Because redtrust is not always taken for the same reason. Sometimes you get redtrust if you are defeated in the bureaucracy inside bitcointalk.
This does not mean that the user is unreliable but only shows that he was defeated in bitcointalk's politics.
That's why everyone in the forum has a say.
Besides, Donald Trump's use of Iphone does not harm Iphone's brand value.

There is no harm to the bounty companies only if the red accounts are each owned by its owner. Or at least one person.
But the vast majority of red accounts have become so solely because of their activities in the bounty, and this is usually associated with multi-accounts.
Thus, letting in the company accounts with a red trust, there is a risk of letting all their multi-accounts in the same way, which will have a detrimental effect on the distribution of rewards.

[meanwords]

Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?

Why not bro lets everyone have the signature and lets everyone promote the projects. We only distinguish the market of crypto promotion in Bitcoin talk but actually everyone can wear the signature doesn't have any problem.
I suggest the bounty managers to accept even the negative trust members when there posting a legit posts with good quality. Let's everyone earn and stay peace.

Actually no, they are red tag for a reason and in my opinion, they don't deserve any privilege that the good users have. Even if they put a signature on their space, people would assume that they cannot be trusted (at least that's what I see it). There's no peace since they are the first one to break it by either scamming or doing something illegal. The manager is risking their campaign by accepting this users.

[coin_1122]

Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?

I think allowing or disallowing participants with Red trust rating is a call of the bounty managers. Although it is important that bounty participants follow rules to sustain the bounty program and it is important that this restriction is stressed-out in the bounty instructions. 

Yes, they keep restrictions for the Red trust rating and they will not allow them to participate in most of the Signature Campaign. We should follow their Bounty instruction because if they announce that they are not accepting any red trust user means definitely it is impossible for us to participate in it.

[Kupid002]

every bounty manager always has a different set of rules, so in my opinion that's normal, and the bounty manager has the right to have strict rules should not accept redtrust accounts

it depends on managers because they have different rules that they have. so I think it's also normal for that as long as it doesn't violate the rules that have been made, if allowed then it's a separate policy from the bounty manager

each manager has his own policy, sometimes the same manager has different rules on several projects. and allowing red trust to participate in a signature campaign, does not guarantee that the project is bad, because what determines the quality of the project itself

Having negative trust doesnt mean they are bad persons . Maybe they just make a mistake before that why they got that , something like selling account . Other manager do not look for negative trust since they are looking for promotion not the issue you have been done before.

[Mianae]

No it isn't being managed by bad manager's some red trust is not as a result of a person's personality most of it are mere accusations and speculations of code of conduct. Red trusts almost never get lifted even when those involved appeal for it.

[Chemcrier]

Every bounty manager ultimately decided how they want to handle their bounty campaign, welcome to the world of decentralisation. Some bounties are even managed by managers who has red trust so this shouldn't come as a surprise, many people in this forum keeps breaking the rules and has not been red trusted yet, so I tend not to think less of those who has it, they have just been caught, there are those that are doing worse but has not been caught yet.

A red trust does not really reflect the behaviour of people whose accounts has it, while some are truly terrible people, I believe that some of them has just made a mistake or two.

[HabiebRiziq]

Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?

I think having an account with a red trust participating in a project does not mean that the manager handling the bounty is bad. For me it is certainly the desire of the company not to prohibit accounts with red trust from participating in promoting the project and there may be other reasons that are the reason why accounts with red trust are allowed to participate in the projects they run, and I think this is something that depends on how the conditions have been determined by the developer.

[youdacapt]

I think having an account with a red trust participating in a project does not mean that the manager handling the bounty is bad. For me it is certainly the desire of the company not to prohibit accounts with red trust from participating in promoting the project and there may be other reasons that are the reason why accounts with red trust are allowed to participate in the projects they run, and I think this is something that depends on how the conditions have been determined by the developer.

there are many developers who only concentrate on the number of investors who enter, and for promotion, they look at how often their signatures are read and remembered by potential investors. So the focus on quality lies in projects that are read by investors afterwards. Then for the bounty manager I think he has communicated with them about the rules used and fulfilled the agreement. The rules for campaigns in the altcoin section are a bit more lenient due to differences in marketing strategies.

[hahahafr]

Campaign rules are made by the team and the bounty manager as well so if that bounty campaign the rules don't disregard red trust account from participating then i guess they can participate as well. lets not forget they are still part of the community and committing a crime does not mean they can not represent any project again.

[ahmia39]

Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?

I think this is very normal, because the EZ365 campaign you are part of also received a red trust account, so there is nothing wrong with the bounty manager, because the bounty managers of E3T and EZ365 are both good managers, not bad managers.