Solution to too many promoters

[imoet]

I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters

JUST IF

Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?

Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants

What do you think??

 I think it will be a great idea if the participants are limited.  But it is seldom to happen.  Most of the projects are making the projects with unlimited participants.  Because they want their projects are promoting by lot of participants so they can get their target easily.

[cryptogeek101]

I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters

JUST IF

Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?

Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants

What do you think??

I quite agree with your humble opinion of having a certain limited number of bounty participants for a particular project,the whole business is suppose to be a 2 ways affairs for the bounty managers and the bounty hunters. After a certain project succeeds, the bounty hunters are suppose to be smiling home with a reasonable reward also

[luckyflop]

Managers here have some power, but they work for the project like the rest of us! They can try to suggest ideas to the team, project owners, they can listen or not, it's up to them. I think we have some good suggestions here, but I don't think this will work, like I said if the team decides to go big with many people and low payouts they will find a manager that will conduct such bounty for them.

there are a number of reasons why they don't limit their participants, it's because they want lots of people to promote the projects they develop. This is not a problem of bounty hunters, but also for the success of the project, so they do not limit participants. maybe there are some projects that limit the participants at this time, but sometimes it's paid using bitcoin or ethereum.

That's right. If they limit the participants, then their project will be less known and it is difficult to be successful. So they want to have as many participants as possible and they don't care about the bounty hunter, after a few weeks of work each bounty hunter will get a few cents from them.

[coinsocieties]

I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters

JUST IF

Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?

Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants

What do you think??

A few years ago bounty participants are not that many as today. It depends on the manager but usualy the project team want more participants on there campaign so more people can promote and more people can reach about there project. The problem in today is because the time frame of each bounty is too long already unlike before that 1 or 2 months is the longer one already in each campaign.

[enhu]

They need to promote their project and this is why they don't care whether how small the fee a participant of a campaign will get as long as they spread the word about the project. If they limit up to $500 each participant for each month then there will only be 4 people who will join the campaign and that is not enough advertising when these users will just post exactly 10 posts as required every week. They would rather be doing it with theymos forum ads than hiring bounty hunters.

[xiboothrezi]

They need to promote their project and this is why they don't care whether how small the fee a participant of a campaign will get as long as they spread the word about the project. If they limit up to $500 each participant for each month then there will only be 4 people who will join the campaign and that is not enough advertising when these users will just post exactly 10 posts as required every week. They would rather be doing it with theymos forum ads than hiring bounty hunters.

And sometimes just want to form a large community, whereas they don't care there are many cheaters. So that the more participants, the greater their social media community.
Limiting the number of participants to a tight selection can form a more qualified community. It will also give bounty participants the opportunity to get a bigger reward. It has all been the decision of the dev team and the bounty manager team, there is no other choice so we must follow these rules.

[JaoBadjap]

Well most of project/bounties I have seen around,
is limiting there participants and when they meet the certain amount, they doesn't accept anymore.
this could benefit the hunters, big reward small attendees
but on the other hand, if the project really needs to get advertise around the crypto world. isn't more reasonable to accept more hunters?

[Psynthax]

It's good to limit participants for the promoters to have a meaningful reward but the project want was many promoter as possible and also to pay peanuts for work done so many promoters won't be able to have meaningful tokens and unable to sell afterwards.

That's the problem. In another side the developer wants more promoters to join and I think this problem will never be solved. BTW the bounty hunters can do nothing caused by the decision will be on the team who managed the bounty.

[CaVO32]

It's good to limit participants for the promoters to have a meaningful reward but the project want was many promoter as possible and also to pay peanuts for work done so many promoters won't be able to have meaningful tokens and unable to sell afterwards.

That's the problem. In another side the developer wants more promoters to join and I think this problem will never be solved. BTW the bounty hunters can do nothing caused by the decision will be on the team who managed the bounty.

The choice is left actually to those bounty hunters. They need to read carefully about the rules and limitations of the bounty program. So whether it is limited by participants or not, it is his decision if he will join or not. So once the bounty is over and he will receive what he was not expecting, there's no one to blame but himself. No one is obliging him to join but it is his own free will. So whatever the results of the bounty, he should accept it and just move on to the next.

[Aaroenz0r]

It's good to limit participants for the promoters to have a meaningful reward but the project want was many promoter as possible and also to pay peanuts for work done so many promoters won't be able to have meaningful tokens and unable to sell afterwards.

That's the problem. In another side the developer wants more promoters to join and I think this problem will never be solved. BTW the bounty hunters can do nothing caused by the decision will be on the team who managed the bounty.

The choice is left actually to those bounty hunters. They need to read carefully about the rules and limitations of the bounty program. So whether it is limited by participants or not, it is his decision if he will join or not. So once the bounty is over and he will receive what he was not expecting, there's no one to blame but himself. No one is obliging him to join but it is his own free will. So whatever the results of the bounty, he should accept it and just move on to the next.

You're right. Bounty hunters have all of the knowledge and experience to know whether a not a project has a risk of scam. However, sometime they make mistake. I believe that they'll not blame anyone else but themselves for that mistake. I also think that they don't have a lot of time spending to blame anyone else but moving on and do another project!

[pilosopotasyo]

I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters

JUST IF

Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?

Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants

What do you think??

Good for bounty hunters but not good for the project, because the promotion will not be maximized and we all know these developers want as many promoters as possible, they even extend the promotion so they can attract more bounty hunters I don't think many of bounty managers will implement this.

[KaratX]

Limited bounty participants all the way  ,this depends on the bounty manager, I believe if bounty hunters promoting such project could come together to make the bounty manager sees reasons he/she can decide to remove registration form for new participants

[Free1bitco.in]

Well most of project/bounties I have seen around,
is limiting there participants and when they meet the certain amount, they doesn't accept anymore.
this could benefit the hunters, big reward small attendees
but on the other hand, if the project really needs to get advertise around the crypto world. isn't more reasonable to accept more hunters?

Well, it's great if all bounties implement this. so, the reward received is quite satisfying, and participants can work hard. it's just that it's very rare to see a bounty like this. however, at present, a project is more focused on the success of their project and tries to attract as many promoters as possible with not so much allocation.

[bitgoldpanther1978]

I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters

JUST IF

Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?

Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants

What do you think??

In some points I hate bounties that has a limits participants and I also hate bounties that has too many participants as well.
So, what I did, I only join in bounties if the participants is below 100 participants, because whether the project campaign will end for good or
not at least there is a high chance for us to earn big in the future, if they will compensate their bounty hunters after the project finish.

[freedomgo]

A campaign is looking for volume of promoters, so sometimes the quality of the bounty was already sacrifice because the bounty managers are not limiting the participants, and you are right, the more participants who will join, the more the reward will drop, and this is not applicable now since usually the price will just dump after it sells in the exchange, so bounty hunters will not be getting a good or reasonable reward.

If you look at it from the company's point of view, the more participants there are, the better it is for them.The thing is, I don't join the bounty if there are a lot of participants. It is not difficult to check the spreadsheet before joining the bounty.

More bounty hunters will join in a project if they see the project will likely to succeed, that will decrease the amount of reward everyone will get.
If you like to join in a bounty with less participants, you can always do so, but the fact that only few have join, that means the bounty is not attractive.

[leea-1334]

Managers here have some power, but they work for the project like the rest of us! They can try to suggest ideas to the team, project owners, they can listen or not, it's up to them. I think we have some good suggestions here, but I don't think this will work, like I said if the team decides to go big with many people and low payouts they will find a manager that will conduct such bounty for them.

Yeah, cannot blame the managers in general, they are also end of the day employees and I have seen some anger towards them for getting paid in advance of the program participants but for me this is unfair, they do much more management work and even in post service. I think,,, people simply just need to take more responsibility.

[kesmex]

usually the many participants are social media bounties, I always see spreadsheets on Facebook and Twitter campaigns of more than 500 participants, in my opinion the solution is only in the bounty manager, because he can change the rules

[FairUser]

usually the many participants are social media bounties, I always see spreadsheets on Facebook and Twitter campaigns of more than 500 participants, in my opinion the solution is only in the bounty manager, because he can change the rules

Most of the participants were bots and used multiple accounts. So there will be a lot of people signing up for those tasks because it's easy to do, and I think they shouldn't limit the participants because it will cause the project to receive less attention from community and there will be few people who know the project

[desfira]

It is inevitable that there are so many bounty hunters, so we get a small prize, it is because of the many bounty scams, so that if there is a legitimate bounty, many will join, whereas bounties with fixed fees with limited participants can also only be in  follow by members with high rank

[Retainly_Collie]

It's good to limit participants for the promoters to have a meaningful reward but the project want was many promoter as possible and also to pay peanuts for work done so many promoters won't be able to have meaningful tokens and unable to sell afterwards.

That's the problem. In another side the developer wants more promoters to join and I think this problem will never be solved. BTW the bounty hunters can do nothing caused by the decision will be on the team who managed the bounty.

Yes, bounty hunters will be able to do nothing but accept their requests. And if we do not accept, we have the right to leave that campaign