New experience about posting behaviour

[TalkStar]

Dear community users,

Welcome everyone to my thread. Every newbies start their bitcointalk journey with the expectation of learning and sharing their knowledge's. Some of you may know that worldwide crypto based platforms use this forum for their promotional purposes and they run signature campaigns here. Currently there is multiple live signature campaigns going on here and usually they give weekly payments to their campaign participants. From my own point of view its an great opportunity for quality poster and higher ranks holder to earn a handsome amount of money by joining a signature campaign.

Its been only a month that i have started my job as a campaign manager and one thing took my attention during managing my last campaign. As we all know that to join a signature campaign participants have to follow campaign rules and some rules are quite common on every campaign. For every campaign there is rules of minimum posts per week. Basically it depends on campaign owners choice but to stop spamming or unnecessary posting most campaign managers love to keep the amount of minimum post/week as lower as possible. I have got a different experience during managing my last signature campaign where weekly minimum post requirement was 25 post. Really disappointed to share with you all that i have got couple of participants there who exactly make 25 post/week. Some of them don't make 1 extra post during participating campaign and i think other campaign managers have similar kinda experience.

My question is:

Do they only post for fulfill the minimum post requirements or post count?

IMO if there is 25 weekly post requirement on a signature campaign then it doesn't mean that you can't make some extra posts. I have seen a lot of quality posters of this forum who are really active and don't care about the minimum requirements of their posting. They only post for helping this community by sharing their precious knowledge to newbies. For that reason every time they make lots of extra posts/week. As a participant if you only post to get the weekly payment then i don't know how much good to see that. Yeah in many circumstances anyone can make less post for a week and hopefully campaign manager will consider that but who make exact 25 post in every week they should change their habit.

There is multiple signature campaign going on and lots of quality posters are there. I have a suggestion for them who will get the chance to join signature campaign in the future. "Post for forum, Not only for fulfill the weekly minimum post requirement"

[Coyster]

It doesn't matter how many posts a user makes per week, some users due to time or maybe knowledge post more than others and it's fine, the major concern should be the quality of the posts, if making more posts will lead to shit posting, then limit yourself to a reasonable number.

There is a campaign willing to pay users for over 50 posts, but many on the campaign make less than even half of that(50). This other campaigns you're talking about, will only pay if users post up to 25 posts, and so many users wouldn't want to post that much, but then they just have to. So is anyone to blame here?

[Rengga Jati]

I think it is about someone's habit. There are some people that only post to fulfill their tasks only, but others always post regularly even they have tasks/signature campaigns or not.

-snip- Really disappointed to share with you all that i have got couple of participants there who exactly make 25 post/week. Some of them don't make 1 extra post during participating campaign -snip-

They have not really good habits, but we cannot blame them for the signature campaign case. As long as they fulfill the minimum requirement, it means they do their jobs correctly.

Well, it is my own opinion, buddy. As a manager, you have an option to put someone on your blacklist if he/she didn't meet with your expectation. But it should be only for a vital case.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Personally being honest, if there were no paying signature campaign in this forum... I don't think it would be as active as it is right now. It would be one hell of a dull place.

Signature campaigns act as an incentive for most members to keep hanging around the forum for extra hours otherwise people would just log in and out without posting anything 

People who post the exact number of minimum required posts per week are probably those chaps who would love to post only 5 - 10 times a week but because of the extra incentive from the signature, they choose to hit the minimum. I don't see any problem with that so long as the posts are good and not spammy.

When i had just joined the forum, most signature campaigns required only 7-10 paid posts per week but right now, i don't think there is such a good campaign that i know that requires 7 posts a week... perhaps times change.

[AverageGlabella]

If a member is posting exactly 25 posts week in and week out while being in a campaign which has a maximum post count of 25 it is probably worth looking at their posts with a little more scrutiny than other members. If their posts are of high quality then it is probably okay for them to be doing this however if you think that another member that is not in the campaign could offer better content then it might be worth dropping them from the campaign.

I would not want members that are posting for the sake of earning in my campaign if I was a campaign manager. Many of the members that do this aren't here to help or participate in the community and if they were without a signature campaign it would probably mean they would not be posting that often. Being a manager is all about these little dilemmas and ultimately its your decision what rules you enforce.

[TGD]

Some users who are knowledgeable enough can share as much post as they wanted as long as it doesn't seems spam and it does really make sense. This time that almost all we need to understand in a forum and about crypto is already posted here all we need to do is to search. Apparently there are some or lazy newbies who still asks and needs to be answered by other users here even they already reached their quota in paid posting.

[GreatArkansas]

Do they only post for fulfill the minimum post requirements or post count?

That's one of negative effects of a forum member participating on a signature campaign, they are talking an advantage.
As you, as campaign manager, you can't do anything since there are rules from the start upon they joining in campaign so here they are.

I also don't know if they don't understand about the rule of minimum posts requirement, maybe they thought no posts should greater than x number of posts or less than, lol, but this is impossible.

[Bttzed03]

I cannot find the post but I think it was yahoo who also said something similar. He also mentioned that it is rare to get participants who does 40-50 posts a week when the minimum is just 20-25. Some signature participants here complain about campaigns being short-lived but they don't really do their best in promoting the company that is paying them like adding extra post/s for more exposure.   

[joniboini]

I think this is more of an ethical issue, and it's difficult to judge they're doing something wrong because there is no explicit rule about it. I also don't think you should decide on that thing if you want to filter which participants are good and which aren't. The focus should be on post quality. But, I think it's fine to add something like "an extra post(s) per week is appreciated and will increase your chance of getting accepted on future campaigns by me".

You can't expect them to 'posts for forums' when they believe that their posting is part of a job. Just like you don't want to work overtime every day because you only get paid for at least 25 hours of work every week.

[tranthidung]

My question is:
Do they only post for fulfill the minimum post requirements or post count?

Yes and No.

Yes: for the most of participants who usually or always make posts to satisfy post quota each week of campaign they join. If the campaign they join ask for 25 posts per week. They usually / always make exactly 25 posts each week, and they don't care about the risks of posts deleted by moderators or threads in which they post trashed by moderators. Consequently, they usually pop up to complain: "Oh, manager, why I did not receive payments for the last week. Please give me a payment and I will make one more post next week as my compensation for lack of posts this week".

Those ones don't care to make one or two more posts each week, because with them 25 posts is exactly their self-limits.

No: for participants who make posts when they see some discussions they can join and help the others.

Those ones, they don't care about post quota. I meant, they of course satisfy post quota (25 posts per week, ie.) but after reaching 25 posts in one week, they will do keep posting if there are situations they can join and help. They don't stop posting after reaching post quota.

For example: I make 40 to 50 posts each week, but the campaign I joined (PlayBetr) only requires 25 posts per week. Do I get more payments (double) when I make 40 to 50 posts weekly? No, but I am going to keep posting, it is my habit and I feel happy with that.

[TalkStar]

There is a campaign willing to pay users for over 50 posts, but many on the campaign make less than even half of that(50). This other campaigns you're talking about, will only pay if users post up to 25 posts, and so many users wouldn't want to post that much, but then they just have to. So is anyone to blame here?

Weekly 25 post is an average posting activities and you will be glad to know that there is a good number of signature campaign participants who make more than 50 posts per week. Making some extra post isn't going to increase the chances of spamming or shit posting. If any campaign participant can fulfill the requirement of exact 25 post then some amount extra post will not gonna make any damage on his posting quality. 

I think it's fine to add something like "an extra post(s) per week is appreciated and will increase your chance of getting accepted on future campaigns by me".

Maybe its gonna work and who don't like to make 1 extra post will definitely get interested. 

They usually / always make exactly 25 posts each week, and they don't care about the risks of posts deleted by moderators or threads in which they post trashed by moderators. Consequently, they usually pop up to complain: "Oh, manager, why I did not receive payments for the last week. Please give me a payment and I will make one more post next week as my compensation for lack of posts this week".

Then isn't it better to join signature campaigns after developing the habit of making quality post. Mods will do their work to keep this forum better for its users. If they fear to make big number of post due to having chances of being deleted by mods then campaign slots isn't for them.
 

[Baofeng]

I cannot find the post but I think it was yahoo who also said something similar. He also mentioned that it is rare to get participants who does 40-50 posts a week when the minimum is just 20-25. Some signature participants here complain about campaigns being short-lived but they don't really do their best in promoting the company that is paying them like adding extra post/s for more exposure.   

You talking about this post?

Really we could just not worry too much about it couldn't we? I see so many people complaining that making 25 posts in a week is too hard, then I read this and see you guys complaining about what timezone are posts counted in so you can make 35 posts a week. So which is it? 25 per week is too many? or hey I can do 35 with no problem?

The point is, just post like normal and find topics you can post constructively in. If you get 5 in a day cool, if you don't oh well.

or this?

There really aren't that many people willing to give their best though. Each campaign(the 1s that I manage) only has so many open spots per rank. No matter who is in the spot in most cases, users are only willing to post enough to get paid. They are not posting because they like a topic, they are not posting because they want to inform others about a subject in most cases, they are posting to be paid. If they're being paid for 20 posts, then they do 20 posts. Every now and then I get a guy who is paid for 20-25 posts per week and they do 40-50 posts a week.

Look at suchmoons small sample Effect of Signature Bans. Even though it's a small sample size, it is a correct view of what happens when users are banned from wearing signatures. Users just fade away into nothing in most cases.

I'm not against users making money obviously, and I would love for everyone to make more money. Users need to stop thinking only about themselves though. When they join campaigns, their first thought isn't how can I help this company. Their first thought isn't to log in to the website and check out the platform. All they are thinking is please accept me so i can make some money.

I'm not trying to personally attack you, my answers in most cases are directed towards everyone but you are the one who posted the topic and the 1 I am responding to. Everyone has an opinion and I feel they should be free to post their opinion, whether I agree or not.

So that pretty much sums up everything. And agree with @joniboini here, more on ethical issues, so it really up to the person itself. Personally I posted more than the required number of post weekly because I feel like it.

[tranthidung]

Then isn't it better to join signature campaigns after developing the habit of making quality post. Mods will do their work to keep this forum better for its users. If they fear to make big number of post due to having chances of being deleted by mods then campaign slots isn't for them.

It is responsibility of managers to choose good participants among so many applicants. If you choose good applicants, their post quality does no long an issue but this time their posting intensities will be likely issues.

Participants who do not satisfy post quota of campaigns are not the ones who make shitposts. It is not always the case like that.

In my previous post, I forgot to mention some others reasons:

• Lack of time in specific weeks: Maybe they are busy with their works in their companies or with unexpected house chores; then they can not meet post quota in one or two weeks (or longer).
• Holidays, vacations, etc.: For example, currently we have been in holidays in most of nations globally, so if you see some of your participants don't make a single post within this period, it is somewhat understandable.

For 'lazy' participants, I recommend they should make extra posts (one to three) each week in order to make sure that if one to three posts deleted by any reasons, they will still be qualified to receive payments. Don't be overlazy.

[adjed]

IMO if there is 25 weekly post requirement on a signature campaign then it doesn't mean that you can't make some extra posts.

The fact is that some people in this forum are such shit posters and find it hard to make quality posts to even meet the weekly post requirements for signature campaigns, and these are the same people that are supposed to make extra posts? I think we should encourage people to make more quality posts no matter how small than to flood the forum with useless replies.

You would notice that threads like Beginners & Help and Off-Topic do not get much traffic because most signatures do not count posts made here as valid posts for payments. We should encourage quality and not quantity, this is why I love signatures organised by top bounty managers in this forum who actually goes through post history and select the Participants they want, not just accepting everybody who applies.

[akhjob]

Not a campaign manager myself, but I believe you can easily identify such people before accepting them for your campaign. While checking for their posting quality, check if they had posted enough in the last month. In your case, if you are looking for someone who makes a minimum of 25 posts per week, check if he had made 120 posts or higher in the last month, that's approximately 30 posts per week. This idea can be combined with the ideas provided earlier by joniboini and AverageGlabella.
Or you can change the payments from Pay per Week to Pay per Post like the Bitvest and 777 Campaigns, that might attract users to post more.

[crwth]

Congratulations on being a campaign manager.

The members that you managed that posted exactly 25 posts per week might have the exact time to have that posts. It may be just because of the minimum or perhaps not. It is up to the user to do it. As long as you do your job, there wouldn't be any problem, IMHO.

I'm one of the users who have a minimum of 25 weekly, but most of the time, I post more than my minimum just because. I love contributing and discussing different things that interest me. It still depends on the user if he/she does more than they have to. It's best to keep track as well.

[Lucius]

~snip~

I don't think the number of posts matters, what really matters is the quality of those posts. If the campaign rules set a minimum of 25 posts a week and someone writes 25 quality posts each week, then he just made what he was asked to do.

We can look at it from another perspective, which is that someone is adapting to the terms of the campaign which is normal, but on the other hand it can be an indication that he/she is on forum only for profit as a professional poster. This is something that is in the domain of campaign manager, who can review each candidate's post history and decide whether or not to accept it. However, it should be borne in mind that there are high-quality posters that for some private/personal reasons become inactive, and this inactivity does not mean that it is someone who will jump from 0 posts to 25 or 50 in one week just because of some signature campaign.

Incorrect is that each campaign has a minimum number of posts, this is not the case with CM - they have the maximum number of posts, but also the participant does not have to write a single post for weeks and will not lose their spot in the campaign. I know that this is a problem for all short-term campaigns who want quick results, but posting behaviour is a result of rules.

[Wysi]

I have experienced this first hand as I have managed numerous campaigns and campaign manager's job is the most difficult things, apart from the fake posts which are made just to achieve weekly if the payment is delayed from the owner than you will find your name in meta and scam section wherein users will be renting about you. I wish users understand the reason behind the campaigns.

[rosezionjohn]

It's a signature campaign, it is expected that most participants will be looking to meet the minimum weekly requirement but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are not posting for the forum. I agree with what others said that if all 25 are quality posts, there should be no issue.

If your campaign has a 25 posts per week minimum requirement, you can add another note in the rules like "preferably an active poster with 30 posts per week on average". That's going to make the selection process easier and you will most likely get participants who will make extra post(s).

[fortunecrypto]

In my experience, I don't count my post because the minimum that I can get is low but there is a maximum that you can get and you are paid for every post, I always hit the minimum requirements but not the maximum requirements I'm still looking for quality posts and do not target the maximum posts