EVOLUTION OF SIGNATURE AD CAMPAIGNS (BEGINNING DAYS TO THE PRESENT)

[joniboini]

the one thing that I am really hoping is those ICO campaigns will pay Bitcoin eth or other tradeable coins in the market

They probably won't do that even if they have the budget. Paying something that they create out of nothing is more cost-effective and save a ton of money for them. I personally think that even if they pay with their own tokens, its still acceptable as long as it is liquid, so the user can cash out quickly instead of waiting for months without clear schedule on when they can sell their tokens.

[Falconer]

Thank you for your hard work to collect signature campaign threads, bringing nostalgia back to 2013 with the time machine participating in all BTC signature campaigns at that time. Still, now we are facing a different era when signature campaigns are getting smaller and bounty scams when people are weak economy during this pandemic.

[UserU]

They probably won't do that even if they have the budget. Paying something that they create out of nothing is more cost-effective and save a ton of money for them. I personally think that even if they pay with their own tokens, its still acceptable as long as it is liquid, so the user can cash out quickly instead of waiting for months without clear schedule on when they can sell their tokens.

TFW maker and withdraw fees are more or less on par with those ICO values, if they're ever tradeable

[Shimmiry]

Can you add their success rate? I mean your thread is already useful for the history of the forum. Yet their participant's rate data would be a helpful guide on what would a successful campaign would look like. I guess most of those campaigns are already successful, yet what stood long? I mean there were campaigns that still runs for years such as Bitvest, which had been a hot campaign ever since it started, and still managed to make a long run.

I'm not good at computation yet the factors would be:
number of participants
campaign's weeks run
how many times they had to close and to reopen their campaign
how many participants lasted for the whole campaign period

[gentlemand]

I wonder if the forum was like Cryptotalk way back when you mentioned there were no post restrictions. Even with the current ones in place, we still see those posters aplenty.

There were plenty of campaigns that had no restrictions on where you posted. It was the abuse of that that caused all of them to gradually narrow down where you could post. There were also campaigns that had no limit on how many paid posts you had per week, or rather respectable ones that weren't Yoshit.

The campaigns we see today were largely shaped by the past behaviour of previous campaign participants, or the past bad behaviour to be more precise.

[Csmiami]

This is the third board I've seen this thread so far; what is going on here?

[UserU]

There were plenty of campaigns that had no restrictions on where you posted. It was the abuse of that that caused all of them to gradually narrow down where you could post. There were also campaigns that had no limit on how many paid posts you had per week, or rather respectable ones that weren't Yoshit.

The campaigns we see today were largely shaped by the past behaviour of previous campaign participants, or the past bad behaviour to be more precise.

Even with the current restrictions in place, those kind of posts are still prevalent. The 75 char minimum thingy for instance, you can't just reply casually in a sentence, instead having to add some fillers.

[Greatdev]

Thanks, this list will atleast strengthen the mind as a bounty hunter wannabe, most of the links I click on are bounty campaigns that happened in 2017, pundix, graft etc, honestly many good campaigns happened in the past

[romero121]

More and more campaigns are being started every month, and the list too has been updated. Maybe we can discuss about new form of campaigns that can be used for the promotion purpose. How about a merit campaign, because most of the users with large number of merits were technically skilled. common users with limited knowledge weren't able to earn merits. If the campaigns send few merits along with the weekly pay it would be helpful to every user to gain more merits.

This is just a suggestion. If I'm against the rules of the forum please correct me.

[Lucius]

How about a merit campaign, because most of the users with large number of merits were technically skilled. common users with limited knowledge weren't able to earn merits. If the campaigns send few merits along with the weekly pay it would be helpful to every user to gain more merits.

I am not sure whether such a distribution of merits would be against the rules of the forum, although it seems to me that such an idea would not be very well-received by the administration and campaign managers. The question arises who will supply campaign with merits, managers who are merit sources or some donators? What we know for sure is that buying/selling merits is against the rules of the forum.

Merits should not be taken as some sort of automatic rewards, I think they still have to be earned on an individual level.

[DdmrDdmr]

<…> How about a merit campaign, because most of the users with large number of merits were technically skilled. common users with limited knowledge weren't able to earn merits. If the campaigns send few merits along with the weekly pay it would be helpful to every user to gain more merits.

That would defeat the purpose of the Merit System, which is to (more or less) reward those posts that have some sort of interesting content. Sending Merits along with campaign payment would:

a)   If sent to every participant, it would go against the spirit of the Merit System, since there should (generally) be a content-based criteria behind.

b)   If sent to a few of the best posters within the campaign, it could be valid from a content point of view. That is nothing a Campaign Manager can´t (try to) do now, but it would certainly be very controversial (especially if made explicit), as Merits are not meant to be a sort of payment for a privately run campaign.

c)   Technically, it would not be feasible for many campaign managers to carry out, since there are not that many that have a largish meriting capability.

[bakasabo]

So this is just a list, but where is the true evolution facts?

Back in 2018, when I started to participate in signature bounties, main rules were 10-15 messages per week with post length not less than 75 characters. Now bounty managers ask to make same 10-15 posts, but post length has doubled. Also managers used to count every post made (except bounty reports), but now they ask to post at least few posts in specific topics or do not count posts in specific forum parts. I remember that almost each campaign accepted Jr.Member accounts, now I see Member or higher wanted.

[NotATether]

So this is just a list, but where is the true evolution facts?

Back in 2018, when I started to participate in signature bounties, main rules were 10-15 messages per week with post length not less than 75 characters. Now bounty managers ask to make same 10-15 posts, but post length has doubled. Also managers used to count every post made (except bounty reports), but now they ask to post at least few posts in specific topics or do not count posts in specific forum parts. I remember that almost each campaign accepted Jr.Member accounts, now I see Member or higher wanted.

It would be convenient for browsing if all the signature campaign links were organized by year, and possibly month. That will give us more insight on how they evolved.

[rdbase]

How about a merit campaign, because most of the users with large number of merits were technically skilled. common users with limited knowledge weren't able to earn merits. If the campaigns send few merits along with the weekly pay it would be helpful to every user to gain more merits.

I am not sure whether such a distribution of merits would be against the rules of the forum, although it seems to me that such an idea would not be very well-received by the administration and campaign managers. The question arises who will supply campaign with merits, managers who are merit sources or some donators? What we know for sure is that buying/selling merits is against the rules of the forum.

Merits should not be taken as some sort of automatic rewards, I think they still have to be earned on an individual level.

This is true.
The campaigns shouldnt be giving out merit since they are paying their campaigners to post.
Yet some campaigns due encourage their posters to do worthy tasks in helping the forum community, by rewarding those who do show receiving the most merits in a given period with compensation, being sent out in a form of a bonus.

[romero121]

<…> How about a merit campaign, because most of the users with large number of merits were technically skilled. common users with limited knowledge weren't able to earn merits. If the campaigns send few merits along with the weekly pay it would be helpful to every user to gain more merits.

That would defeat the purpose of the Merit System, which is to (more or less) reward those posts that have some sort of interesting content. Sending Merits along with campaign payment would:

a)   If sent to every participant, it would go against the spirit of the Merit System, since there should (generally) be a content-based criteria behind.

b)   If sent to a few of the best posters within the campaign, it could be valid from a content point of view. That is nothing a Campaign Manager can´t (try to) do now, but it would certainly be very controversial (especially if made explicit), as Merits are not meant to be a sort of payment for a privately run campaign.

c)   Technically, it would not be feasible for many campaign managers to carry out, since there are not that many that have a largish meriting capability.

I can understand the true meaning of the merit system, but for the effort put forth, users doesn't get the merit rewards. This is happening with the reputed members of the forum. Particularly I can see a lot of users getting merits for whatever they post. Particularly on local boards few members are getting merits like anything. Particularly on Russian and Arabic boards. I'm not against that, but I don't get how that's possible. Some person has merited the same thread, same response twice or thrice.

[DdmrDdmr]

<…>

That is probably something to discuss in another thread if need be (so as not to derail the topic here too much - although it is your thread). On a quick tone though, Campaigns should not make-up for merit distribution areas of weakness nor for the difficulty some will undoubtedly have in being awarded merits. I’ve always been a defender of the more (meriting) eyes on the board, the better, since it introduced variety in criteria, and a greater scope throughout the forum.