Should we red tag and create a flag for ICO bounty managers that do not escrow

[Saisher]

This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.

[Squezzi55]

Firstly I would like to thank you guys for creating this Escrow posts, this is the second one I'm reading today, thanks once again, I believe it's time we stand up for ourselves, enough is enough, if we can all come together as one we can easily decide how to handle this bounty payment evasion.

If bounty managers want us to join their campaigns they should make sure Escrow is available, can we all come to this conclusion somehow?

[Festac]

Not using Escrow isn't rule breaking, that will be too harsh and unjustified, all we can do is make them start using Escrow, assuming a new bounty project got released today and it isn't escrow I expect every bounty hunters to turn away, if this happens gradually the bounty managers will make the move.

[Festac]

The main headache here is some bounty hunters won't co-op with this plan, many bounty hunters don't care about their rights and that's why some project team refer to bounty hunters as penny workers or calling us names, not getting paid must stop but we can't control people to do things, I do wish all bounty hunters can co-op, this is the only way

[Quintrix]

Firstly I would like to thank you guys for creating this Escrow posts, this is the second one I'm reading today, thanks once again, I believe it's time we stand up for ourselves, enough is enough, if we can all come together as one we can easily decide how to handle this bounty payment evasion.

If bounty managers want us to join their campaigns they should make sure Escrow is available, can we all come to this conclusion somehow?

We really need to start something like this or the complaint of locking, not distributing will persist, imagine some projects are taking over a year to distribute, some failing to distribute after 2 to 5 months of working they keep breaking their rules, even if the token come out with no value at least we got what we worked for a long time.

[Nalbo]

You can give anyone a red trust if you think dealing with them would lead to a loss but trust except from DT members are not visible unless you view them on user settings.
Whether or not to give a red trust to bounty managers if the bounty run by them failed to reward users have always been a hot topic here. But asking for escrow is the basic thing bounty managers should to that would act as a prevention. Even if the tokens don't carry any value in the end.

[bubbalex]

I think this is too much, not all projects without escrow scams. Although it is good for the campaign and the participants, it is not always possible, including for technical reasons, for example, in Cartesi bounty tokens have not even been released at the time of the start of the bounty, but later all received payments. Bounty hunter should do own research and take risks as well as bounty managers. Witch hunt is not good, you should create flags and send negative feedbacks only in case of scam, not just because someone didn't used escrow. It is not so easy to force team to do escrow, many teams don't want to do it, they want to control distribution for hunters on their own.

It is really a hot topic and there are opposite opinions, I just dropped mine.

[btcltcdigger]

This is completely idiotic suggestion IMHO, and for several reasons:

1) Not every project wants to escrow or give away their tokens
2) Not every project wants the bounty manager to distribute, but prefer to do it themselves
3) Not every project uses smart contract to distribute, some use exchanges or proprietary wallets
4) Some projects will run bounty before TGE, so they can't escrow their tokens because they don't exist yet
5) Even if they escrow the tokens, it doesn't mean the project isn't a scam. More than 70% of scams had an actual token, which is worthless.


What i would suggest, DYOR. Don't sign up for every shit that pops up in the bounty thread. There's plenty of posts on this forum where you can get hints and clues on how to identify scams.
Don't blame others for your ignorance

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.

I disagree giving them red tag, bounty managers are just the middle man here, you can't just accused or flagging them because the projects turns out to be a scam. They themselves was a victim here, they don't have total control of what the project, whether locking, delaying and not distributing the bounties. That's the risk that every bounty hunter should have in mind before joining.

[btc_angela]

Majority of the projects doesn't want to escrow, that's a fact, so bounty managers doesn't have the power to force them to used escrow. If he/she insists, then the projects has the options to hire other bounty managers, simply as that. Yes, I love the idea of having an escrow, but it should be mandatory, unless the projects themselves are willing.

[btcltcdigger]

Majority of the projects doesn't want to escrow, that's a fact, so bounty managers doesn't have the power to force them to used escrow. If he/she insists, then the projects has the options to hire other bounty managers, simply as that. Yes, I love the idea of having an escrow, but it should be mandatory, unless the projects themselves are willing.

This!

They simply see a bounty manager, no matter how respected or trusted he is, as a liability, and won't release funds directly to him. Yes, that "might" be an indication of scam, but in my experience, it's just people from non-crypto world entering crypto market, and don't know how things work. And that's fine.

And as said above, if you insist on escrow, they will just find a different manager and/or do the bounty themselves.

[Bttzed03]

It's an abuse of the trust system if you tag BMs on the basis of not having an escrow alone. There was no violation (yet) to begin with and there's no evidence that they'll run away. However, they can be tagged if proven that they were negligent in doing their job and that they knew something fishy is going on but decided to run the bounty campaign anyway.

I do agree that hunters can force these projects to escrow the funds. Bounty managers can do the same. Hunters can if they do not participate while managers can refuse to run their campaign.

What you should really ask is why external bounty managers don't reject/drop these campaigns with no escrows? It starts with them. If the argument is that the team can still launch it on their own, hunters can just ignore it.

[thesmallgod]

Unless the bitcointalk staff makes Escrow for bounty hunting compulsory and the bounty manager did not comply. That is when we can admit that the bounty manager has breaking the rule and can be red tagged. Since nothing like this exist, there is nothing anyone can do to them. Many of them do write disclaimer post at the bottom of a bounty post, stating that they are not part of the team

[joseyphil82]

Oh boy, this doesn't make any sense, do you know many escrowed bounty project that bounty detective team released? Majority of them still failed, escrow doesn't guaranteed that the projects will become successful, if they failed to raise fund those escrowed tokens are waste.

[joseyphil82]

Some projects are exchange based and they aren't ERC20 tokens, how will they introduce escrow? It's never going to work, some haven't even launched their tokens yet, believe it or not, what you are aiming for won't be possible for many new projects

[bigcash2011]

This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.

I think its time to run bounty campaigns professionally, either the forum team or another platform should register bounty managers as well as the project team and then the team should send the campaign reward tokens to the trusted escrow team. Who after campaign end should either distribute reward tokens directly or transfer them to bounty manager for distribution. Without a proper system bounties will continue to disappoint.

[Lhaine]

This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.

Actually not , if you know the manager doesn't escrow the funds or the token payment and you think it's not secured on your side. The answer is simple do not join no one is forcing you to join in a bounty that you don't like to be one of their advertiser.

If you want a secured payment then join only in a campaign that give you a secured payment before they start the bounty's.

[kidbounty]

I guess none of this is the bounty manager's fault. I think if there is a choice between using or not, all managers prefer to use Escrow. the problem is the project team, they are to blame. There are lots of bounty managers who are exposed to redtrust simply because they are part of the shit project. this too should concern us all.

[pilosopotasyo]

If the project looks dubious and shady and they do not want to escrow they should be tagged, honestly it's hard to impose on the developers, because they have a lot of options, like managing their own campaign, or getting other bounty managers who will not ask for escrow, even if you tagged these bounty managers, bounty hunters will still join, there are bounty hunters who join and actively promote even if there is already bad reports on the project they are promoting.

[Stanlo]

This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.

This is another definition of injustice, you could end up with many red tags yourself lol, what did bounty managers did wrong mate? They are only following the teams order, even if a bounty manager decided to pull the escrow stunt it's on the team to accept or decline.