In the best interest of investors, Bounties shouldn't be paid in Tokens

[milewilda]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

This is why many bounty hunters failed in the past years, I know that almost all bounty hunters dump their tokens in the past but the few that held did so amazingly well, because the tokens surged in 2021 and many made lots of money, most new alt bounties are from projects that haven't raise any fund, the best way to go about this is to pay bounty hunters with their tokens, it is left for bounty hunters to do diligent research first before promoting any project.

Bounty hunters would always took the blame on being the main dumpers on the time that the coins/token is being listed without even trying to look or realized that the ones who do make out those dumps
are the main presalers who do hold of a huge chunk of coins that they had bought earlier.If we do see on the piechart on how much token is allocated for marketing then it is really just
that small which i could say that it wont really be that enough on making some impact in overall price.Lets just really that get rid of this kind of idea because people doesnt even
realize on whats happening behind those candles. 

[lobo13hf]

Bounty hunters would always took the blame on being the main dumpers on the time that the coins/token is being listed without even trying to look or realized that the ones who do make out those dumps
are the main presalers who do hold of a huge chunk of coins that they had bought earlier.If we do see on the piechart on how much token is allocated for marketing then it is really just
that small which i could say that it wont really be that enough on making some impact in overall price.Lets just really that get rid of this kind of idea because people doesnt even
realize on whats happening behind those candles. 

agreed sometimes even when bounties was yet to be distributed market already dumping and bounty hunter always took the blame meanwhile even airdrops are being held at the same time and there has been some incentive programs before hand, if a coin is dumping so hard then I guess one should make it have more liquidity through betterment of the project, there are many other projects that didn't even flinch despite the massive airdrops it have.

[Bobrox]

agreed sometimes even when bounties was yet to be distributed market already dumping and bounty hunter always took the blame meanwhile even airdrops are being held at the same time and there has been some incentive programs before hand, if a coin is dumping so hard then I guess one should make it have more liquidity through betterment of the project, there are many other projects that didn't even flinch despite the massive airdrops it have.

Bounties campaign allocation usually under 2% if payment trough paid in token, there are seems impossible will get impact price drop drastically when first time listing on the market. But seems fact with many time after coins distribution have impact dump more than 5% until 20% and need long time wake up to higher price.

Still confused how possibility with 2% reward coins allocation for Bounties participant have bigger impact and make price drop, I don't stand with bounty campaign participants but its not their mistake when receiving coins from bounties sell as soon possible after having price and they have been waiting for several weeks joining campaign and duration time for distribution.

[Bay_Harbour_Butcher]

to be honest, I really agree that bounty hunters should not be paid with the token project, because of course this will have a negative impact on the continuity of the project, we all know that most bounty hunters will immediately sell the tokens they get when the token is listed on certain market, this will have the impact of dropping the token price drastically, so that it is very detrimental to investors

[Kelvinid]

to be honest, I really agree that bounty hunters should not be paid with the token project, because of course this will have a negative impact on the continuity of the project, we all know that most bounty hunters will immediately sell the tokens they get when the token is listed on certain market, this will have the impact of dropping the token price drastically, so that it is very detrimental to investors

But if you will understand their intention why using their native token instead of using established coins like ETH and BNB, you'll somehow get the idea of why they use it. I'd see that the situation is not the problem of the developers or the project itself but it dumps because of these hunters who care nothing about the project improvement and they are just after for money only, not by helping crypto to grow. In this case, if the situation will continue, it was too hard to expect new projects to grow but rather see them falling apart.

[carrie_white]

there are many reasons why most bounty hunters are paid with native tokens, but the most appropriate reason is because the developers of the project do not have sufficient allocated funds to pay bounty hunters using USD or BTC, therefore the developer pays bounty hunters after investor funds have been collected with native tokens

[Xal0lex]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

To somehow stimulate the development of projects that use the Bounty model, we need to introduce a vesting system, as implemented on IDO Launchpads. People receive coins, but they cannot sell them all at once, but only after a certain period of time, and the unlocking will happen gradually, monthly by a few percent of the total stake that has been earned by the bounty hunter. This way there won't be an abrupt withdrawal of liquidity from the project.

[xCryptoManiaX]

I don't see that happening.

Reason 1: Basically free marketing. They are giving out tokens. They don't pay straight out of their pocket.

Reason 2: Usually the amounts they decide to give to bounty hunters isn't that big. So there will be little to none market impact.

[isaac_clarke22]

~

This has been like a common thing that some other users are confused. They think that just because bounty hunters or even those "Airdrop" hunters sold their tokens would cause a collapse on the price immediately. It's hardly going to make any difference.

Maybe the only thing to notice from that is the high selling pressure when observed in the charts. There should be other factors that contribute to the price drop aside from just those users selling. Sometimes it is just the project itself being crappy and not valuable at all.

[abel1337]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

It was ages ago when bounty hunters wants them to be paid by token because most of the projects before where going to the moon and as far as I remember, Those projects who are paying in $ are just being ignored by bounty hunters. Though today is different and in an completely opposite scenario. Most Altcoin projects that has bounty campaigns don't succeed and is easily being abandoned resulting the bounty hunters having little to no pay with their service. Today bounty hunters just want something stable as payment for their service that's why they projects who offer USD based or reward token that has a value are always crowded by bounty hunters. I don't think it's healthy for a project to pay in token as bounty hunters today are immediately selling their rewards compared before that most bounty hunters are trying to hold and maximizing the value of their reward token. Yep, It's somehow way for project to lessen the cost of promotion by giving away their tokens but they didn't recognized that it's the one that triggers the downfall of their token upon release since majority of bounty hunters are rushing to sell their tokens as soon as they get their rewards.

[Anonylz]

Most teams don't care much about the value of their tokens otherwise they will most likely consider the option of paying bounty with any other tokens than the native token of the project.
Protecting investors' investments is not a strong point to some teams, they are too stingy to want to pay with stablecoins, hence they will rather make payment with their tokens knowing the possibility of that token getting dumped is high. only a few teams sometimes consider this.

[mulia sabee]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

what you mean in my opinion is not right, we fellow bounty hunters also maintain market stability and do not damage the price or value of a Bounty token. the amount of tokens held by bounty hunters is not going to make the market worse I don't think, as there are very few tokens in circulation and held by bounty hunters. I think what you are proposing is the wrong idea

[southerngentuk]

Everything cannot be absolutely perfect with crypto when many of us do not understand the most basic concept. Like many others here, I have also experienced joys and sorrows with bounty programs, airdrops, tests, ... so I understand the feelings of those who contribute work and it's almost worthless. And only a few can bring laughter. But anyway, such a process gives me a lot of skill in assessing which projects might be potential.

[wxa7115]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

what you mean in my opinion is not right, we fellow bounty hunters also maintain market stability and do not damage the price or value of a Bounty token. the amount of tokens held by bounty hunters is not going to make the market worse I don't think, as there are very few tokens in circulation and held by bounty hunters. I think what you are proposing is the wrong idea

Back then when bounties were popular I think a case could have been made about bounty hunters having too much power as the amount of coins that was distributed to them was huge.

But now the amount of coins being given to bounty hunters is very low, so even if they sold their coins at the same time we should not see a big movement on the coin in question, and if for some reason this was the case then you will know the coin is not a good one anyway as it cannot endure such a low selling pressure.

[nazmul30]

Everything cannot be absolutely perfect with crypto when many of us do not understand the most basic concept. Like many others here, I have also experienced joys and sorrows with bounty programs, airdrops, tests, ... so I understand the feelings of those who contribute work and it's almost worthless. And only a few can bring laughter. But anyway, such a process gives me a lot of skill in assessing which projects might be potential.

I agree with you.  Because very few people can be successful from here.  Most people get scammed from here.  So I'd say no one can ever improve by working on Bounty, maybe they can get some money for a while and they won't be able to move on completely.  Almost 90% of people are victims of fraud in this sector.  So I would say good for any work.  And there are some managers who get 100% profit if they work.  Some managers have a bad reputation.

[Farma]

I don't see that happening.

Reason 1: Basically free marketing. They are giving out tokens. They don't pay straight out of their pocket.

Reason 2: Usually the amounts they decide to give to bounty hunters isn't that big. So there will be little to none market impact.

for the first reason, it's obvious. some teams might recruit customers this way while minimizing advertising dollars. Personally, I have supported several bounties, they sometimes encourage bounty hunters to use the applications they develop. it can also have an impact on their products because indirectly, we will become their consumers, and we will also advertise their products.

the second reason should be the most important reason. because the tokens distributed to hunters are only a few, it shouldn't affect the market. however, the fact is that it affects a lot, and many investors object to it. Not many projects actually survive this state.

[ElmedoRator]

There's a lot of talk about the quality of bounty programs, and I think it's not about what they do and how interested the projects are in these programs.
So most of the community encouragement is to give the participants what they have, because most of the bounty programs I see are projects that lack capital and are looking for investors, only a few have money available. face and pay to the community. And it doesn't matter if a project is of good quality, it doesn't matter whether it is paying for tokens or other cryptocurrencies, but the problem in the first place is that those projects are reputable enough to not take advantage of hunters. .

[fvb]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

I participated in projects that changed the rules when they apparently understood that it would be better for them to pay out not with their own tokens. And they paid for the bounty in stablecoins and the reward was worthy for me personally. But if they paid in their tokens, it would be 5 times the minimum

[Ziskinberg]

There's a lot of talk about the quality of bounty programs, and I think it's not about what they do and how interested the projects are in these programs.
So most of the community encouragement is to give the participants what they have, because most of the bounty programs I see are projects that lack capital and are looking for investors, only a few have money available. face and pay to the community. And it doesn't matter if a project is of good quality, it doesn't matter whether it is paying for tokens or other cryptocurrencies, but the problem in the first place is that those projects are reputable enough to not take advantage of hunters. .

That is a common problem this time as most bounties turn into scams after paying the participants which really have no chance to sell their rewards in exchange for their hard work and effort promoting their project. Because it was very okay to have their tokens as a sort of reward provided that there is assurance that participants can get what it meant for them, not just shitcoins that only got stuck in their wallet forever. Of course, nobody will become happy with that situation but rather regrets and hatred.

[SyndicateLabs]

The benefit here makes me quite funny!

We are all increasingly aware of the market conditions that determine the quality of the bonus programs. To me in the past there were some bonus programs that brought in a lot of money, but it is becoming more and more inefficient and meaningless to be able to make money in this market.
Some of today's new ways for projects to interact and refer them to are more effective than bounty programs, so bounty will not really appeal to many people.