Do you think that some signature campaigns prioritize clients in some cases?

[Poker Player]

Well, first of all I'm not sure if this thread belongs to this board, if you think it doesn't, tell me and I'll move it or report it.

The title is not quite accurate either because due to the maximum number of characters I have not been able to put everything I wanted.

It has happened to me sometimes that when I have seen the people accepted in signature campaings I have not understood very well why certain people have been accepted and not others. This has happened to me only when there are vacancies, like 1 or 2 and with decent signature campaigns, I don't mean the crappy spam like 1xBit and others like that.

In the decent signature campaigns, as I said, sometimes I have seen members with little merits in relation to the activity, for example, chosen over people who have a much better ratio, and I think the main reason could be that it is taken into account that they are customers of the business. Probably at least part of what they are going to earn in the signature campaign they are going to spend in the business (or even more if it is a casino).

I don't know what you think about this. It is clear to me that the campaign managers will not only take into account the merits in relation to the activity, but also if they post on certain boards for example and other factors.

As I say, this has only happened to me in certain cases, in campaigns that I consider decent and that, in general, have quality posters.

Is this my guess or do you think I might be right?

[1715624360]

1715624360

[1715624360]

1715624360

[1715624360]

1715624360

[1715624360]

1715624360

[1715624360]

1715624360

[suchmoon]

Is this my guess or do you think I might be right?

How would the campaign manager know who is a customer? If they judge looking at user's posts and the user tends to write a lot about the business then sure, there might be some objective value in accepting that person over someone else. But having an expectation that they'll spend the money with said business - I really doubt it.

IIRC there are (or were) some campaigns that paid participants via their sites, so they can probably expect spending, but then every participant is essentially a customer in that situation so it wouldn't make much of a difference in selecting whom to accept.

[DarkStar_]

In the decent signature campaigns, as I said, sometimes I have seen members with little merits in relation to the activity, for example, chosen over people who have a much better ratio, and I think the main reason could be that it is taken into account that they are customers of the business. Probably at least part of what they are going to earn in the signature campaign they are going to spend in the business (or even more if it is a casino).

I think it definitely happens, though I'm not sure how common it is. A few years ago I remember seeing a pretty reputable campaign for a gambling site accept someone who I considered to be a spammer. I later found out that they were either a mod on that gambling site or a very active player (can't remember which one specifically), so it might make sense for the site owner to want to keep them happy.

Purely looking at merit ratios isn't a great indicator though. It's way easier to get merits in some boards compared to others.

How would the campaign manager know who is a customer?

The person paying for the campaign might know and can ask the campaign manager to accept specific people.

[mk4]

While idk, I'm pretty sure this isn't outside the realm of possibility. Taking a heavy user of your platform(hence the company making good amounts of money from that specific user) under your campaign can be some sort of PR move. Something like eCommerce sites handing over gift cards or item discounts to their loyal customers.

[Poker Player]

Purely looking at merit ratios isn't a great indicator though. It's way easier to get merits in some boards compared to others.

Well, as I said before:

It is clear to me that the campaign managers will not only take into account the merits in relation to the activity, but also if they post on certain boards for example and other factors.

But I did think that would be the main statistic to look at.

Do you mind sharing what other factors are taken into account, and if there are any more important ones than that?

[Lubcub62]

although I haven't joined the campaign yet. but I'm studying the reasons people get rejected and accepted.

some time ago or few days ago I saw a new campaign for gambling sites. and it takes around 32 people to register.

then many registrants came, even many senior members and legends and full members and members did not miss it.

but when the announcement was received it turned out that there were several senior members who were not accepted. and even many member accounts are accepted.
then I search for accounts that are not accepted.
apparently because of a campaign about gambling. then the senior members who are not accepted are those who rarely post on the gambling board or have never. then of course not accepted.

then i see the accepted account. oh it turns out they are active in gambling discussions.

so the determining factor in this regard that I learned is . before registering like we have to be active on the board which will be in accordance with the campaign that opens vacancies.
e.g. a new token or altcoins project campaign. then we have to make interactions on the altcoins board. so when the manager checks the account. will be seen at the top of our posts according to the campaign that is being run.

[DaveF]

And the manager of the campaign is looking for a certain "tone" of posts or other things.
Do they lean a bit to the left politically or a bit to the right?
Do they tend to not start new topics and only reply?
Are they from the EU or US or Asia and although they are looking for posters from all over they want more from area "X"
And so on.

So although good posts are important I can see having a lot more criteria.

-Dave

[noorman0]

In some cases, managers also evaluate the results of previous campaigns of the same type (say a casino campaign). If it shows poor results such as site traffic that is not boosted, then there is nothing wrong with looking for "new" participants in the hope of getting better results even if they have to ignore general campaign requirements eg. merits.
Whatever the reason, the interests of the client (the brand) should be a priority.

[JeromeTash]

I don't think they prioritize clients, but even if they did, it's for the best interest of the business that is being advertised. Different campaign managers have different preferences on posting styles. Some prefer local board posters, others prefer people who post in boards where there is no room for spam such as Development & Technical Discussion.

[aioc]

Well, first of all I'm not sure if this thread belongs to this board, if you think it doesn't, tell me and I'll move it or report it.



It has happened to me sometimes that when I have seen the people accepted in signature campaings I have not understood very well why certain people have been accepted and not others. This has happened to me only when there are vacancies, like 1 or 2 and with decent signature campaigns, I don't mean the crappy spam like 1xBit and others like that.

I'm not a bounty manager but based on my observation When there are only 1 or 2 spots left in a decent signature the bounty manager will check the best participants based on their qualifications and how the campaign will be served better and how the members behave by checking his reputation in the forum

In the decent signature campaigns, as I said, sometimes I have seen members with little merits in relation to the activity, for example, chosen over people who have a much better ratio, and I think the main reason could be that it is taken into account that they are customers of the business. Probably at least part of what they are going to earn in the signature campaign they are going to spend in the business (or even more if it is a casino).

There are a lot of good posters that don't have the required merits but they are qualified because of their activity and trustworthiness

I don't know what you think about this. It is clear to me that the campaign managers will not only take into account the merits in relation to the activity, but also if they post on certain boards for example and other factors.

Yes because it will have help the cause of the campaign if you're a bounty manager you only want people who can promote the project effectively with a good reputation

As I say, this has only happened to me in certain cases, in campaigns that I consider decent and that, in general, have quality posters.

It's a big factor the manager will not pay spammers it will harm the reputation of the manager

[Darker45]

There are probably various factors involved, but what is certain is that merit to activity ratio is not the main barometer. It has to be the posts.

For instance, a signature campaign is launched promoting a casino. Somebody applies with low activity but abundant merit, albeit earned mostly in sections, boards, and threads like reputation, scam accusation, meta, wall observer, local, off-topic, and so on.

I haven't been a manager myself, but if I were in the shoes of the manager, I won't be picking him/her. I would be picking somebody else who's got high activity but very low merit but who is so active and constructive in gambling discussions. After all, it is where I want my brand to be most visible.

In my observation, merit is not that easily earned in gambling discussions.

[Despairo]

I think it's understandable, the purpose of signature campaign is promoting the project isn't? Clients usually more familiar with the sites and have better knowledge rather than average person. As long as the clients isn't his alts, there's no problem IMO.

Merit and activity is just a requirements, it doesn't make the campaign manager reach the final decisions, it just show you're quite active. Accepting participants due to high merit and activity alone is wrong. Let's imagine someone applied casino campaign, he have 1000+ merits in the last 120 days but all of his posts in local board, the campaign doesn't accept local board. This mean, that's user doesn't even got any merit outside local board and he isn't familiar with gambling and global board.

[hugeblack]

Sometimes the board in which you post is more valuable than the quality of your posts. In the end, signature campaigns aim to obtain a financial return and not support content on quality (a secondary goal), and therefore if a person publishes in a board where no one else posts  (local board/Mining boards), the chance of the ad/signature appearing is higher from some other boards.

Therefore, the quality of the posts is not the only criterion for selecting a member, but rather one of the most important criteria.

[Taskford]

Sometimes merit is not all about since sometimes it will all matter on which board those the participants post as the company want to target more higher audiences. And beside signature campaign is not solely created for merits they are aftering for mass exposure. I know managers know what they are doing that's why they are successful as well the company they are promoting because they are getting the best result by the help of their acquired signature campaign participants.

[buwaytress]

I can't really tell over the past few years, as haven't been paying much attention, but I do notice some seemingly favoured participants over others. The newer casinos (or rather, newer campaigns) don't appear to prioritise merits and post quality as much as activity and participation across more threads -- including altcoins, which I guess makes sense if you're looking to build visibility and attract new customers.

My take on this is that older accounts are less likely to be experimenting with new coins and new casinos, plus -- the handful of degen gamblers (I say this as a compliment, mind you) I happen to know on the forum aren't generally posting what might be considered "meritorious" or even high quality posts by others.

Whether or not this is truly how campaign managers or owners identify their preferred participants I don't know, I suspect not in a formal marketing way anyway.

[Lubcub62]

Sometimes merit is not all about since sometimes it will all matter on which board those the participants post as the company want to target more higher audiences. And beside signature campaign is not solely created for merits they are aftering for mass exposure. I know managers know what they are doing that's why they are successful as well the company they are promoting because they are getting the best result by the help of their acquired signature campaign participants.

well ... so basically every bounty manager has his own criteria in choosing or deciding who is accepted and who is rejected. and of course those who are accepted are people who meet the criteria prepared by the manager.
Certain criteria are prepared and arranged for the success of the project to be promoted. it is clear that selection by specific and different criteria is required for each different project.

[Poker Player]

well ... so basically every bounty manager has his own criteria in choosing or deciding who is accepted and who is rejected. and of course those who are accepted are people who meet the criteria prepared by the manager.

Well, it is clear to me that merit and in relation to the activity is very important for all quality campaigns. This is what I have seen in the signature campaign I am in and after seeing many applications, those who have applied having much more merits than activity have been accepted shortly after submitting the application. There are other factors, of course. And a new campaign is not the same as one that has been running for many years and only needs to fill a couple of slots, in the latter case maybe some specific characteristics are prioritized over merits.

... the handful of degen gamblers (I say this as a compliment, mind you) I happen to know on the forum aren't generally posting what might be considered "meritorious" or even high quality posts by others.

I believe that accepting "degenerate" gamblers in certain gambling campaigns is very profitable for the casinos because they end up losing everything they earn in the signature campaign and more.

[buwaytress]

I believe that accepting "degenerate" gamblers in certain gambling campaigns is very profitable for the casinos because they end up losing everything they earn in the signature campaign and more.

I'd agree. Pay some guy several hundred dollars a week that you know almost for certain he'll gamble away as free money, and add more of his into chasing the losses, and you sort of have a self-serving use case.

And you get visibility in the threads HE is active in (which may not necessarily even be close to he types of threads a "high quality" poster might even think to visit).

Preferable, you'd also want more of his type -- birds of a feather.

So yeah, definitely makes sense for a sig camp to recruit based on their needs.

[examplens]

There are other factors, of course. And a new campaign is not the same as one that has been running for many years and only needs to fill a couple of slots, in the latter case maybe some specific characteristics are prioritized over merits.

I would say that you have already answered your question in the first post. after meeting the some posting quality, the next thing that matters is where that user writes posts.
I remember one signature for the casino now closed (one of the longest-lasting with higher rates), I talked to the manager because some of the participants wrote 90% of their posts in the local Pilipinas section, where I got an answer that the owner of the campaign is very satisfied with that because they have many users from that area.

[NeuroticFish]

In the decent signature campaigns, as I said, sometimes I have seen members with little merits in relation to the activity, for example, chosen over people who have a much better ratio, and I think the main reason could be that it is taken into account that they are customers of the business. Probably at least part of what they are going to earn in the signature campaign they are going to spend in the business (or even more if it is a casino).

Imho your title is misleading because you wrote clients instead of employees Edit: At a second thought I was wrong with this line.

And yes, it happens that the campaign manager prefers certain people or certain type of people.

It may depend on:
* where they post
* posting style
* whether the campaign manager has already worked with certain people

And also yes, actual customers may be prioritized, since they can advertise the business better and from their actual experience, although in this case the campaign manager may have to be part of the staff of that business.
But usually it goes the other way: they pick good people from the forum, pay into the business/website account (especially in case of gambling) and they'll get people that will advertise better the business and may also lose some money there in the process...