Can you create a signature campaign for OP posts?

[o_e_l_e_o]

as far as I can see the campaign is looking for a total of 16 members which is a totally insignificant number

Sure, but it sets the precedent that this kind of behavior is both desirable to the advertiser and permitted by the forum. I suspect we might see other, larger, campaigns start to ask for similar posting requirements.

For a good poster, it might not be a problem, but we know that ~90% of bounty spammers aren't good posters. Most will open threads which have been discussed 100 times before, or are simply legalized plagiarism in the form of stolen content with a link at the bottom.

We also know that bounty spammers don't just see their posts being trashed and accept it. Any thread of theirs which is trashed will simply prompt them to create more so they can still hit their quota.

[crypto1010]

as far as I can see the campaign is looking for a total of 16 members which is a totally insignificant number

Sure, but it sets the precedent that this kind of behavior is both desirable to the advertiser and permitted by the forum. I suspect we might see other, larger, campaigns start to ask for similar posting requirements.

For a good poster, it might not be a problem, but we know that ~90% of bounty spammers aren't good posters. Most will open threads which have been discussed 100 times before, or are simply legalized plagiarism in the form of stolen content with a link at the bottom.

We also know that bounty spammers don't just see their posts being trashed and accept it. Any thread of theirs which is trashed will simply prompt them to create more so they can still hit their quota.

They will not get paid then. They are doing that anyways, our campaign is not going to change that. The admin of the forum could have blocked signatures a long time ago if he really wanted.

[20kevin20]

I think there is no reason to worry too much, as far as I can see the campaign is looking for a total of 16 members which is a totally insignificant number when compared to what had the largest spam campaign with over 600 members producing thousands of spam posts per day.

16 members * 5 threads = 80 threads per week
80 threads per week = 320 threads per month
That is equal to 23 threads every 2 days..

Keep in mind that each member will most likely write at least 6 posts per week to make sure at least 5 will count. That changes the final answer to.. 27 threads every 2 days.

Speaking from purely personal experience: When you have to hit a high max target in order to maximize your weekly payment (e.g. BitVest paying a maximum of 60 posts/week), you get to a point where you struggle to hit that target and therefore you start bullshitting. This is something I really do not want to do, but subconsciously I did it every now and then. And I'm sure the best of us do it.

23 threads/2 days as a requirement is gonna hit BitcoinTalk hard. I think I've made 4 threads in the past month and I barely ever feel the need to do it unless I have an opinion I really want to share or some news I'd like to tell others about. Trust me, there's gonna be a point where these participants will not know what to write threads about anymore as they'll run out of news articles.. so you can warmly welcome bullshit, shit-threads and spam.

Sure, but it sets the precedent that this kind of behavior is both desirable to the advertiser and permitted by the forum. I suspect we might see other, larger, campaigns start to ask for similar posting requirements.

For a good poster, it might not be a problem, but we know that ~90% of bounty spammers aren't good posters. Most will open threads which have been discussed 100 times before, or are simply legalized plagiarism in the form of stolen content with a link at the bottom.

We also know that bounty spammers don't just see their posts being trashed and accept it. Any thread of theirs which is trashed will simply prompt them to create more so they can still hit their quota.

I second your thoughts.

They will not get paid then. They are doing that anyways, our campaign is not going to change that. The admin of the forum could have blocked signatures a long time ago if he really wanted.

Big difference between paying for posts and paying for threads. I can write +50 posts a week but I assure you that I'm gonna run out of ideas for new threads very often. I expect a lot of "is craig wright satoshi or not?? what do you think  " kind of threads..

How are you going to decide whether a thread is going to be counted toward the weekly requirement or not? "Not paying them" sounds kinda fishy to me. One member may have a legitimate question, ask it and then you decide it doesn't count because the question's been asked before?

[GazetaBitcoin]

This looks for me as a certain manner which should not be enforced during a campaign.

Besides, the payment for the participants is ridiculous, taking into account the effort they should put in order to accomplish the requirements. Even more ridiculous seems the discrepancy between payments for Sr. Members and payments for Heroes / Legendaries. As I can see, a Sr. Member earns 400% less than Heroes / Legendaries. I think I never saw such a discrepancy before.

In addition, the rule "In total, its 5 OP Posts + 5 Posts on the first page of a thread and 10 more on the 1,2 or 3rd page of any thread." is supposed only to bring spam, as I find to be extremely difficult for a legit user to accomplish it.

This campaign is a great example for how things should not be done and I'll add this exemple to the thread Are there needed general (common sense) rules for signature campaigns?.

[GazetaBitcoin]

.
i am under the impression this account was sold, it was dead silent for around a year and a half then came back posting unlike the previous post, it is constantly making post for daomaker.com since coming back. I'm going to snoop a bit more but there's something fishy going on here.

It's either that, or OP has no experience in running campaigns. Afterall, he's just a Full Member here, which earned just 4 merits in 24 months, spent only 5 merits (out of 52) in 24 months, therefore nothing good can be expected from him...

[crypto1010]

This looks for me as a certain manner which should not be enforced during a campaign.

Besides, the payment for the participants is ridiculous, taking into account the effort they should put in order to accomplish the requirements. Even more ridiculous seems the discrepancy between payments for Sr. Members and payments for Heroes / Legendaries. As I can see, a Sr. Member earns 400% less than Heroes / Legendaries. I think I never saw such a discrepancy before.

In addition, the rule "In total, its 5 OP Posts + 5 Posts on the first page of a thread and 10 more on the 1,2 or 3rd page of any thread." is supposed only to bring spam, as I find to be extremely difficult for a legit user to accomplish it.

This campaign is a great example for how things should not be done and I'll add this exemple to the thread Are there needed general (common sense) rules for signature campaigns?.

I have warned OP in his signature campaign thread this is a bad idea all around, and you're right this is extremely difficult for any non spamming user to do. I for one would not join such a spam promoting campaign, this guy is just a walking billboard of how not to do a campaign. Honestly the company behind this needs to be aware of what a shit show they are trying to run.


Edit: I noticed OP seems to be a topic creation spammer himself, so he probably sees no issue in it. 10 topics in one day just this week, all the same category altcoin discussion(Some within 5 minutes of each other).These topics all have an extremely similar format and are all based off of daomaker.com a site that deals in social mining but it's just low quality spam to me.

Second edit: i am under the impression this account was sold, it was dead silent for around a year and a half then came back posting unlike the previous post, it is constantly making post for daomaker.com since coming back. I'm going to snoop a bit more but there's something fishy going on here.

I understand that you are probably angry because you don't like the pay, I see you have tried to participate in 2 different sig campaigns in the last few days.

[nydiacaskey01]

The problem with this kind of rule in a campaign is not only that spam threads might be created every hour, you might also see an increase of number of threads with redundant topics. Topic that are already discussed a few months ago or perhaps years and the op will just say, sorry I was not able to catch that. Its the same with posts that requires them to post specially in the first 3 pages.They will post because they want to be paid and not to share anything that is worth sharing to the community.