The sincere bounty managers should escrow bounty rewards

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

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 bounty campaign.

Not everyone will have the privilege to join a signature campaign paying in established coins like bitcoin and ethereum most especially as the slots available are always limited which results to competition by applicants giving the managers the choice of working with merit earned in the last 120days and post quality.

The best advice should be they should only participants in bounty paying in already established coins (bitcoin and ethereum, etc) to avoid been paid in worthless coin irrespective of the bounty allocation been escrowed or not.

[kayvie]

i've joined one of his bounty that hes handling and it was pretty great to less scam because of escrow but some of the escrow bounties i've been their tokens are not tradable or something its almost useless.

Well, not because the tokens is being held by a trusted user/bounty manager or an escrow means that it is already successful and can be trade after the campaign. It only shows that this escrow service is indeed good but it doesn't guarantee that the token you will received will have a value after the campaign.

[t3m4nc0k]

the question is, will all projects agree with the decision to pay their tokens first to the manager or escrow? because surely every project will not agree with it except the forum that sets up the upfront payment rules for each project token

[jessyj48]

Nope, not all project devs will want to do that, honestly I can't blame them if they fail to trust a bounty manager because some bounty managers can get greedy later and send tokens to few bounty participants

[Novatech8]

Bmy.guide was crap, earned little dollars around 10$ I think, escrowed or not doesn't always make sense like that because bounty managers can reap you off as well, I think the best judgement is fixed allocation bounty and escrow is a single package

[southerngentuk]

the question is, will all projects agree with the decision to pay their tokens first to the manager or escrow? because surely every project will not agree with it except the forum that sets up the upfront payment rules for each project token

The forum cannot coerce projects in cases like these. It all depends on the decision of the project and the bounty manager, but as I see it, good and quality projects will never need escrow. They will try to reach out to the best managers here and run a campaign

[gundala]

the question is, will all projects agree with the decision to pay their tokens first to the manager or escrow? because surely every project will not agree with it except the forum that sets up the upfront payment rules for each project token

Of course not. In fact we can see now, some use Escrow and some don't. I think, if the dev team is truly committed and has planned all of its promotional efforts well, it must have prepared a budget for the bounty. So there is no harm if the funds or allocations that have been prepared are channeled through escrow, reciprocally, will form a strong bond of trust between the dev team, the bounty manager, and the participants. IMHO. Of course, this is a dilemma, projects with low budget will definitely have difficulty with the pretext of fundraising first.
The only way to deal with this situation is to be patient, and accept all harmful things like risks.

[StephenJH]

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 bounty campaign.

Not everyone will have the privilege to join a signature campaign paying in established coins like bitcoin and ethereum most especially as the slots available are always limited which results to competition by applicants giving the managers the choice of working with merit earned in the last 120days and post quality.

The best advice should be they should only participants in bounty paying in already established coins (bitcoin and ethereum, etc) to avoid been paid in worthless coin irrespective of the bounty allocation been escrowed or not.

I have observed the same things over and over in the last signature campaigns. After the merit requirement, it is hard to earn the 5 merit in altcoin discussion boards and the campaign manager prefers to choose the best quality posters with highest earned merits. Managing the bounty campaign is not easy, I understand but this should be left to the reputable bounty managers. I strongly suggest Hhampuz because he always control the spreadsheet with great affords. Just my 2 cents.

[adzino]

Things would become too complicated for them I guess, for which they try to avoid using escrows to secure the rewards for the users. But, yeah, they should do it. For whatever legit reason they might deny the payment to some of its users (multi, rule breaking, spamming etc), when the escrow agrees to it (and will actually agrees if the claims are true), the at least the user won't cry saying that he got scammed.
Won't also blame the users since once they make a mistake, they get removed without being notified by the bounty manager (which is to be honest, completely unethical).

[ameliana]

Such a method is indeed very good to do for gift managers, so as to prevent fraudulent developers in the distribution of token allocations for project participants themselves. on the one hand we know that after the project is successful but there are still negative points, such as reducing the allocation of prizes to prize hunters.

[Crypto5060]

Bounty Ox if I'm not mistaken escrows bounty rewards in order to make sure that the hunters don't work for free but get their reward.

[TopT3ns]

Such a method is indeed very good to do for gift managers, so as to prevent fraudulent developers in the distribution of token allocations for project participants themselves. on the one hand we know that after the project is successful but there are still negative points, such as reducing the allocation of prizes to prize hunters.

there are some bounty managers like that, because some time ago I found a case like that, so for bounty hunters, they have to be careful when they want to participate in a bounty campaign as much as possible to choose a truly trusted bounty manager.

[Viscore]

Such a method is indeed very good to do for gift managers, so as to prevent fraudulent developers in the distribution of token allocations for project participants themselves. on the one hand we know that after the project is successful but there are still negative points, such as reducing the allocation of prizes to prize hunters.

there are some bounty managers like that, because some time ago I found a case like that, so for bounty hunters, they have to be careful when they want to participate in a bounty campaign as much as possible to choose a truly trusted bounty manager.

If that is the case then they should only joined in bounty campaign which reward are on escrow, but the bounty hunters are so big, these campaign might not be able to accommodate their volume as some bounty managers also set a limit on the participants.

[meanwords]

Nope, not all project devs will want to do that, honestly I can't blame them if they fail to trust a bounty manager because some bounty managers can get greedy later and send tokens to few bounty participants

What are you saying? Of course there will be a calculations for that and the bounty allocation and bounty rewards will be calculated. The bounty manager won't be able to get away with it. At least it is safe to think that our tokens are safe and can be redeemed if a bounty is finish.

I think this is a one step closer to cleaning out scams by having an escrow. Because if they are really genuine and trustworthy, they will make their loyal bounty hunters trust them. Escrow is cheap anyway and probably a legit project would be able to afford it if they really want to.

[shinratensei_]

At a point this was really the headway after many bounties refused to honour their side of the contract to pay hunters, bounty managers have to escrow tokens meant for hunters in order to protect their interest.

That being said that so many times the managers have already tried to use escrow but the team is always trying to refusing it caused by they will lose the control over the funds to ran the campaign.
I have been so many thread discussed about this but it never be a real thing for sure.
Hunters must bet on their own decision.

[Devotea]

To Escrow bounty rewards wouldn't be a bad idea as it will help to reduce the rate at which hunters are been denied of their reward after they must have worked for month. Julerz12 is a bounty manager that have proven that hunters must get their reward. I hope others will follow suit and with that I believe with that, the rate  of scam projects will greatly be reduced

[FairUser]

To Escrow bounty rewards wouldn't be a bad idea as it will help to reduce the rate at which hunters are been denied of their reward after they must have worked for month. Julerz12 is a bounty manager that have proven that hunters must get their reward. I hope others will follow suit and with that I believe with that, the rate  of scam projects will greatly be reduced

For this method, bounty hunters will definitely receive a reward after the campaign ends. But it does not guarantee that those projects will be listed at exchanges, I see a lot of projects he manages are not listed at any exchange and those projects are completely nonsense.

[inanilujimi]

every bounty manager has its own specifications and quality, we cannot force the bounty manager to have the same rules as other bounty managers. the way the team gets the hype that will make the project choose the value in the market is the most important thing in my opinion.

[Arkann]

every bounty manager has its own specifications and quality, we cannot force the bounty manager to have the same rules as other bounty managers. the way the team gets the hype that will make the project choose the value in the market is the most important thing in my opinion.

I think that each manager of the company’s bounty rewards the participants not only on the basis of their established rules and conditions, but also does this on the basis of the proposed common pool for the company’s bounty from the side of the project developers.  I believe that the manager cannot give more than was allocated for the Bounty company.  But each manager of the Bounty companies himself calculates what benefits the subscription campaign or social networks, as well as bloggers and the YouTube channel individually bring.  As always, a little more has been allocated on social networks recently, because, as always, a lot more people participate in social networks.

[sayam]

I'm completely agree with your timely opinion. I suffer from it myself, already worked many projects but did not receive any payment. So I hope if we take this step we will be worth our hard work.