The sincere bounty managers should escrow bounty rewards

[hinorizk]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

[Zeke_23]

This is a good way for bounty hunters to receive their tokens on time after completing the bounty. But it doesn't help them make any money because the token needs to be listed in exchanges so we can sell it, if these projects are not developed and listed in exchanges then I think that we only receive worthless tokens

Well, that is somehow true. This is indeed a good way for bounty hunters to have receive their rewards at the end of the project but it won't guarantee that the rewards will have its value unless the project team will list it in an exchange.
In the end, even having escrow or the bounty manager will handle the reward, we won't guarantee the success of the project.

[Viscore]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

If reward are in escrow, bounty hunters will be able to receive it right away and they can dump it in case the coin will be listed in an exchange.
it's a great initiative but like I said, it's also important that the value of the tokens we will receive as a reward is not gonna be too low compared to its original price so we bounty hunters will be able to get our expectation and we will be able to enjoy it.

[thisnewcoin]

The situation of bounty hunting is very bad nowadays! Altcoins bounty hunters haven't received any payment in this year, no good bounty came in altcoin boards. Some good project conducted bounty but their budget was 3-5K USD! Recent a bounty project came with 1900$ worth TRX coin budget for all the campaigns. It's an insult I assume! So, escrowing is not the solution here. Julerz escrowed but see the result. Bmy.guide participants did not get a penny, I was a signature participant but my earned coins were valueless from the first. In the Geoma Dao campaign, the future is not clear enough! So, I suppose some established project needs to come with a good allocation to save the bounty hunters! Otherwise, they are passing really hard time!

[Mpamaegbu]

OP is apt on this and I share in their thought. Perhaps theymos should make this a governing rule.

Keeping bounty funds in escrow does not stop I'll treatment on the hunters by projects. Some projects can be outright scam yet funds are escrowed that re ders the tokens useless upon distribution. Stable coin payments bounties should be encouraged.

At least, the BMs should do their research before accepting the contracts and be true to themselves not to only concentrate on what they can get out of the bounty as payment at the detriment of hunters. I know quite alright that BMs get paid in BTC or other already listed coins like ETH/Litecoin, other than the bounty tokens. So, to a greater extent they're exempted from the hardship hunters go through after bounties have ended.

I'm quite sure every bounty manager would had love to escrow the bounty allocation to prevent cases of their participants not getting paid but I don't think they're to be blame since the project developers hiring the bounty manager has the final say as If they're not interested in escrowing the funds there's nothing the bounty manager can do and if he/she regrets the job, other managers will be willing to take up the job.

That is why the BMs have to be less self-centered. They should insist on escrow and know that whatever that will be will surely be. If it's their contract to get, it will surely cone back to them. They don't have to lower standard so they can get a bite out of every pie. How do you think Julerz makes it? Do you think he hasn't lost some contracts for insisting on escrow or whatever that is right?

[matchi2011]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

If reward are in escrow, bounty hunters will be able to receive it right away and they can dump it in case the coin will be listed in an exchange.
it's a great initiative but like I said, it's also important that the value of the tokens we will receive as a reward is not gonna be too low compared to its original price so we bounty hunters will be able to get our expectation and we will be able to enjoy it.

Bounty rewards is just a small portions of the actual invested money which being collected from the initial sales, it won't hurt the actual exchange value if the developers are ready to place a barrier to their projects. Beside, it's the hunters right to sell it if they chooses to liquidate the tokens, they work for it and they deserve to do whatever they've think is good for them. Though understanding your point, I also agree that the rewards should be on it's original value and not a heavy dumped price once being listed to any exchange.

[Mulann2]

Well not a bad idea at all, doing this will mean the team are willing to pay, this type of action will only make the project look half legit, still doesn't guarantee that project will be in any exchange,  a token with exchange is literally useless, although it is highly unlikely that a token don't get listed so I would say I fully support of this suggestion,
However, not all team will ne willing to escrow bounty payment because most of them aren't genuine.

[Harlot]

This would be 1 step towards safety and a boost in participants right to receive the rewards. Though it doesn't exactly prevent the project from scam or the token not being able to list on any exchange or getting no value. All users can be sure is they get the bounty tokens. That's several folds better than no insurance at all.

A project just showing that they are willing to escrow payments only mean that they are willing to pay their participants, I think that this is also just shows how the project wants to move forward with their vision overall. They aren't like these types of scam projects that will suddenly disappear and make the bounty manager be the one who take the fall. Actually what Julerz is doing is probably for his own safety and I can't argue with that since a lot of bounty managers are already becoming the only guilty party here for being irresponsible and their reputation lost just because of one scam. They should have some kind of standard guaranteeing their participants of a payment.

[palle11]

This manager had another bounty in which he used escrow for rewards. It was called DAXICO, it was a cryptocurrency exchange.
As a result, at the end of the bounty, everyone received payments, but the project itself turned out to be a scam.
I lead to the fact that escrow is not always a guarantee that you will be paid with something of value.

Sometimes is better you know that you received the token or coin than the coin being listed and doing very fine but it was not distributed to bounty hunters.
To add to that, even if it is of less value, it is better to have your labour awarded to you.

[xiboothrezi]

If reward are in escrow, bounty hunters will be able to receive it right away and they can dump it in case the coin will be listed in an exchange.
it's a great initiative but like I said, it's also important that the value of the tokens we will receive as a reward is not gonna be too low compared to its original price so we bounty hunters will be able to get our expectation and we will be able to enjoy it.

This is often used as an excuse for Dev who is not confident in his own product. How could they be afraid of bounty hunters shaking their prices if the project was truly accepted by the market? how big is the allocation for hunters? I guess that is just an absurd reason.

Well, I totally agree with Escrow. This increases the confidence of the participants that dev is truly committed to providing the right rewards, especially now that there are many dramas in the bounty campaign. However, please note that the existence of escrow is only a guarantee that you will get a reward, whether it is valuable or not depends on market developments.

[kaneki007]

With escrow bounty hunters will not be afraid if they are not paid and payment is according to schedule. It should be like that because seeing that there are many campaigns that do not pay participants, and also campaigns like this should be handled by experienced managers.

[Danslip]

This manager had another bounty in which he used escrow for rewards. It was called DAXICO, it was a cryptocurrency exchange.
As a result, at the end of the bounty, everyone received payments, but the project itself turned out to be a scam.
I lead to the fact that escrow is not always a guarantee that you will be paid with something of value.

Sometimes is better you know that you received the token or coin than the coin being listed and doing very fine but it was not distributed to bounty hunters.
To add to that, even if it is of less value, it is better to have your labour awarded to you.

This is what teams don't want to do. The idea is to hold the bounty rewards for a long time and send everyone's bounty award in the bull market. With this way, the dump affect will be minimized, anyway, I agree escrow is the best, efficient solution for the obvious reasons.

[FairUser]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

A lot of projects cheated and used bounty hunter for free. Recently I saw a project that was Insure, after they made a bounty for 1 month, suddenly they stopped and declared not to pay bounty hunters, obviously they are a big scam in this market. Hopefully their project will quickly collapse and no one will invest in them

[pikkie]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

A lot of projects cheated and used bounty hunter for free. Recently I saw a project that was Insure, after they made a bounty for 1 month, suddenly they stopped and declared not to pay bounty hunters, obviously they are a big scam in this market. Hopefully their project will quickly collapse and no one will invest in them

That is what makes many projects worse because the good name of the cryptocurrency project has been used for crime, which ultimately makes many investors who have been disappointed with an existing project that no longer trusts the crytpocurrency project.

[CaVO32]

Yes with this. So many time bounty hunter got scammed by shady team that literally want to use bounty hunters for free.

A lot of projects cheated and used bounty hunter for free. Recently I saw a project that was Insure, after they made a bounty for 1 month, suddenly they stopped and declared not to pay bounty hunters, obviously they are a big scam in this market. Hopefully their project will quickly collapse and no one will invest in them

I think they only paused the campaign based from their announcement. I encountered this thread that the OP said that it is one of the best projects in 2020 but suddenly stopped. So I checked the thread of Insure and saw the ANN from the team. So if they will not resume after a month or so. At least they should give the share of those bounty hunters that already did their work.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5238435.msg54171190#msg54171190

Anyway, that's the risk of joining token paying campaigns. They have the right to change in the middle of their campaign. And so it is the risk that the participant should consider before joining in. We can't control this situation because it is the project's team themselves have the say with their own project.

[NeuroticFish]

Anyway, that's the risk of joining token paying campaigns. They have the right to change in the middle of their campaign. And so it is the risk that the participant should consider before joining in. We can't control this situation because it is the project's team themselves have the say with their own project.

Any campaign has the right to change, but only if at the moment of change or pause they offer a refund/reimbursement for those who don't want to wait or don't like the new conditions. That's how things should go normally.
On the other hand, unfortunately the bounty hunters may get paid in a token which is not listed anywhere, which they agreed at start and then also the reimbursement will be basically worthless and this indeed is a risk (the same risk they took at start).


If the tokens are not listed (worthless at the start of the campaign), obviously there's a problem and a high risk for the bounty hunters. But as long as some will work in these conditions, the token bounties will exist. And these cannot be escrowed.



But there are also bounties for valuable tokens with no escrow. Why that happens I don't know. Of course it would be a good advertising for the bounty, but I guess that it also comes for some extra costs (which maybe the token issuer doesn't want to pay).

[bgaf]

It should be like that because seeing that there are many campaigns that do not pay participants, and also campaigns like this should be handled by experienced managers.

How I wish all the campaigns on the altcoin section used escrow. But this isnt the case. Lucky those participants who were able to joine escrow tokens. Ive seen campaign such as Guide and GeomaDao which are both handled by Julerz12.

But not all ICO/IEO phase project where gonna agree to this, especially if they dont have funds yet. I can see the reasons why some are dont like this method. These are funds that will be given to escrow still at risk. Also, there are chances that the token escrowed will be valueless in the end so its gonna be useless after all if they dont pursue the project.

[Kupid002]

It should be like that because seeing that there are many campaigns that do not pay participants, and also campaigns like this should be handled by experienced managers.

How I wish all the campaigns on the altcoin section used escrow. But this isnt the case. Lucky those participants who were able to joine escrow tokens. Ive seen campaign such as Guide and GeomaDao which are both handled by Julerz12.

But not all ICO/IEO phase project where gonna agree to this, especially if they dont have funds yet. I can see the reasons why some are dont like this method. These are funds that will be given to escrow still at risk. Also, there are chances that the token escrowed will be valueless in the end so its gonna be useless after all if they dont pursue the project.

Its doesnt help if the funds allocated for bounties is bieng escrowed ,  even if the bounty managers has a control or hold   the allocated tokens payment it will not help .  you cant sell it after the bounties ended  So what will be the different having it or not.

Remember that most of the ICO we have here does not list in any exchange.

It will only work if the tokens is already listed and escrow hold the funda for payment.

[lienfaye]

Im sure bounty managers are willing to escrow the rewards and be the one to distribute for the participants but the decision is not on their hands. The dev/team is the one to decide whether to entrust the rewards to the one who will manage the bounty, but usually they prefer to give it at the end of the campaign. Well for me the value of the tokens are more important, because it will still be useless if you get your rewards on time but it has no value and cant be traded thus your effort will be wasted.

[bitcoin31]

Let say the campaign manager hold the funds of the bounty campaign but that coin they still holding the value is 0 Is so useless..
After the bounty and the manager sent to the members who join campaign their stake but what if the coin is not listed or still scam project they wasting time . So I recommended to join signature campaign than the bountt campaign.