Bounties managed by team themselves

[suryapro]

Team still have the final say whether handling the bounty themselves or through Bounty manager, this one of the reason bounty managers don't just accept to work with anyhow team, they first do their findings and be sure the team they are working will be honest with theirs words.

[viananda2525]

dev team prefer to reallocate bounty manager allocation to another part. and its not wrong if dev team using their human resource to manage bounty campaign and  by doing this way they save some money that used to pay Bounty manager. its good money management from dev team , and usually BM from dev team  dicipline to give an update .

[gwaposakon]

I agree. I think it is still good that bounty will be managed by an external manager to give some assurance to participants. If the bounty manager is part of the team, I observed that campaigns normally gets ill-managed. This is why its good to have outside bounty managers, their experience provide assurance that the campaign will run smoothly.

[Tomohisa]

I noticed that bounty projects that managed by the team themselves usually have a lower quality compared to bounty managers for hire. Sometimes, it was so bad to the point they don't even know the rules of the place need to advertising (for example, bitcointalk).

[WalkerIVIV]

dev team prefer to reallocate bounty manager allocation to another part. and its not wrong if dev team using their human resource to manage bounty campaign and  by doing this way they save some money that used to pay Bounty manager. its good money management from dev team , and usually BM from dev team  dicipline to give an update .

That's right, they will save a large amount of money to develop the project. Or they can use that money to increase the budget of the bounty, we don't need to be overly concerned with the manager of that campaign. Just care about the quality of the project

That depends on whether the project has its human resource that wanna tries to manage the campaign or not. i have seen some projects were using the manager or rent the bounty manager to do this job when the team was thinking if they need proffesional manager

[bussybuddy]

I noticed that bounty projects that managed by the team themselves usually have a lower quality compared to bounty managers for hire. Sometimes, it was so bad to the point they don't even know the rules of the place need to advertising (for example, bitcointalk).

I think otherwise, there are many successful bounty without the need for a professional manager. And their rules are the same at this forum, just go through a few bounty then I believe they will get the best rules

[totoy4741]

Even if the project got bounty manager still they can't force the bounty team to pay the rewards for participants if they are refusing to do.Bounty manager is also need to be an important factor that everyone should consider but don't take it for granted, do your own research on the team as well.

There are some bounty managers who sell their reputation in order the get higher pay day. They even break his/own rules upon by request of core team of bounty he/she is handling so it does make any matter at all. Join in those who you know that are respectable and dedicated to his job in bringing qaulty projects for his/her hunters.

[aditasetia123]

dev team prefer to reallocate bounty manager allocation to another part. and its not wrong if dev team using their human resource to manage bounty campaign and  by doing this way they save some money that used to pay Bounty manager. its good money management from dev team , and usually BM from dev team  dicipline to give an update .

That's right, they will save a large amount of money to develop the project. Or they can use that money to increase the budget of the bounty, we don't need to be overly concerned with the manager of that campaign. Just care about the quality of the project

reallocating budget very important for team, they will have more money to pay operational cost or maybe for salary core team.using own team for managing bounty campaign could maximize human resource usage and they will have important experienced moderating community that usually in hurry for newest update.

[Stanlo]

It's dangerous to promote projects that's been managed by team themselves, they can break their rules themselves, we noticed something like this with first round of Oikos bounty where the manager almost ruin everything, few members almost create a scam accusation about the project before the CEO fixed things himself

Yes oikos BM is a perfect example of why it's bad to join bounties managed by team themselves, they launch second round of bounty campaign last week and the BM randomly picked bounty hunters leaving too many unapproved and today they decide to left out all junior members, this is an inexperience bounty managing, toying with their own rules and wasting the time of those who joined the project last week

[arufox]

Yes, i agree with you, team managing campaigns themselves is not good because most are not a good project. And there are so many problems especially with distribution, sometimes distributions are too late, distribution pause, and the most serious thing, team doesn't pay bounty hunters. So bounty managers will a solution for this problem.

Yes oikos BM is a perfect example of why it's bad to join bounties managed by team themselves, they launch second round of bounty campaign last week and the BM randomly picked bounty hunters leaving too many unapproved and today they decide to left out all junior members, this is an inexperience bounty managing, toying with their own rules and wasting the time of those who joined the project last week

- We reserve the right to adjust the conditions of the bounty campaign at any time

I think you are one of many who is not approved, Oikos signature champaign is limit for 150, so you should stop hoping

[fuer44]

what often happens is usually the rules that change in the middle of the bounty in progress. usually becomes mandatory kyc, or backward distribution of tokens. What's worse in my opinion is when at the beginning they (the team) made a large exchange list such as binance, or etherdelta, but in the end it was listed on exchangers with minimal liquidity. it is a disappointing thing in my opinion because it does not match at the beginning, but changes occur when we are already in.

[SyndicateLabs]

Yes, i agree with you, team managing campaigns themselves is not good because most are not a good project. And there are so many problems especially with distribution, sometimes distributions are too late, distribution pause, and the most serious thing, team doesn't pay bounty hunters. So bounty managers will a solution for this problem.

Yes oikos BM is a perfect example of why it's bad to join bounties managed by team themselves, they launch second round of bounty campaign last week and the BM randomly picked bounty hunters leaving too many unapproved and today they decide to left out all junior members, this is an inexperience bounty managing, toying with their own rules and wasting the time of those who joined the project last week

- We reserve the right to adjust the conditions of the bounty campaign at any time

I think you are one of many who is not approved, Oikos signature champaign is limit for 150, so you should stop hoping

Obviously, the manager can change the rules at any time. They just want to be good for their project and fair for everyone. Now I see their update, they have expanded their budget and accepted all previous participants

[Dariusburst]

I like what bounty detective team are doing presently, there is no going back once a bounty got introduced by bounty detective because they use escrow, they handle the distribution at their own convenient time, you don't have to worry about not getting paid because all tokens are in bounty detective hand

There are some of their bounty projects they don't have total control, like Basic Finance project they promoted last time, bounty hunters made several complaints against the distribution by the team and Bounty Detective said they can't do anything aside the issue because the team project were the ones in charge of distribution, some hunters completed their KYC and were denied access to their login into their account.

I think that was in the past, I knew about Basic Finance bounty and there is no guarantee payment from bounty detective on basic finance bounty thread, you can easily know which bounty Campaign is escrowed by this bounty manager because it's visible on the bounty threads

[lumeire]

Success or failure depends entirely on the project. Bounty manager is just a hired employee and helps project management campaign. I personally only evaluate and select bounty according to the quality of the project, I'm not too concerned about the campaign manager.

The bounty manager is also just like us, he just get paid for the work he does for the team, but since he is higher up the food chain, so he does actually gets paid pretty hefty amount of money for the work that has to be done. But there are also demerits in being a bounty manager that he has to check a lot of participants and also this takes a lot of time and sometimes leads to an argument with some people over distribution of stakes.
Bounty managers like the head of social media marketing as they are providing the team with a lot of influencers and also a lot of reach on social media, so if the manager isn't that good then definitely the project is gonna suffer.

[Mpamaegbu]

Bounty managers are the only thing standing in between hunters and project team, it's bounty managers job to make sure they bounty hunters get paid for their work but sometimes when the team starts behaving weird there is nothing the bounty manager can do about it.

Bounty managers are also helpless sometimes. If the BMs don't escrow the funds, there is nothing much they (BMs) can do to aid the distribution of rewards at the end of the bounty. I have participated in various bounties managed by BMs but the distributions were done by the project teams. Some distributed the rewards while others didn't. Some that even distributed gave strict conditions while some wouldn't allow hunters to withdraw to their private wallet. All the time BMs were helpless in those scenarios.

[Sanugarid]

what often happens is usually the rules that change in the middle of the bounty in progress. usually becomes mandatory kyc, or backward distribution of tokens.

But you need to understand that in participating a campaign the team has the right to change all the rules of the bounty at any moment given that they have noticed something fishy or in need of something.
Most of the time this is drive by the anomaly in the spreadsheet such as having an alternative account of a user, I do believe the campaign manager also have the right to suggest it to the team.

What's worse in my opinion is when at the beginning they (the team) made a large exchange list such as binance, or etherdelta, but in the end it was listed on exchangers with minimal liquidity. it is a disappointing thing in my opinion because it does not match at the beginning, but changes occur when we are already in.

That was just the target, If it happens then good if not then try to other. Every project dreamed of being listed on an exchange that has a huge reputation in the community to gain confidence in the market.

[BitcoinTurk]

Although the situation you are talking about is something we do not encounter very often today, I think that some regulations should be introduced by the forum management for such campaigns. First of all, I think that various measures should be taken such as limited regulation of the campaign conditions after the start of the campaign, provided that the project and the campaign managers have no connection. Unfortunately, since there are no such rules or regulations in the system of today, the project team has the control they desire under all circumstances and the campaign participants can experience victimization for this reason.

[ChronoLite]

Even if the project got bounty manager still they can't force the bounty team to pay the rewards for participants if they are refusing to do.Bounty manager is also need to be an important factor that everyone should consider but don't take it for granted, do your own research on the team as well.

but reputable bounty manager would make any campaigns run smoother by saving the bounty pools to escrow or to bounty manager itself, i have seen other managers to do that and most of them are paying and successful both the ieo and bounty events, but it doesnt mean you should rely on that. like you said, research for the teams behind the project is mandatory

My opinion regarding about bounty programs if you are a participant - don't expect you will get the reward on time and with their target price.
Even reputable BMs are being screwed by these projects, unless they will give the allotted tokens to a particular escrow before the campaign begins.
Either way, the risk is still there, unless you join a btc paying campaign. That I can say has high chance of getting paid.

thats what i meant, even those campaigns are held by reputable managers but it doesnt mean its good at any case. its great that you can get your rewards, but does the reward really pay decently? that's a problem. so the main issue here is the project itself that you are promoting

[abeecrypto]

I haven't observed this. And yes, bounty mangers are very important. But it all depends on the kind of bounty manager. If the bounty manager isn’t persuasive enough to change bounty protocols or rules in the interest of both the hunters and project, things might not go so well. There are few bounty managers who are really doing well being bounty managers. These are the ones that make much difference.

Regardless, it is important to always do your due diligence before participating in any project.

[crustycrab666]

I'm not here to discourage you about bounty campaigns that are managed by the project team themselves, I'm here to tell you that you need to be extremely cautious, I've noticed that team managing campaigns themselves is not good
---snip
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees things this way, or am I?

However, we cannot generalize that the bounty campaign handled by the dev team itself always ends up being a scam or disappointing. From the important points discussed by the OP, the risk could be greater because they are free to change the rules and allocations arbitrarily without regard to justice for bounty hunters. But what else can we do? bounty campaigns handled by external managers also don't necessarily guarantee that we will get a fair reward, it's all back to the dev team's decision.
Escrow is one solution to uphold justice, so this can be considered as well.