Royse777 will not pay anyone for the last week /Sinbad campaign/

[notblox1]

I was not member of recent campaigns managed by Royse, but I am little surprised how he was handling things recently.
He knew that mixer campaigns are not going to be allowed next year in forum but he increased rewards with unrealistic high payment rates to make his campaign highest paid and to attract good members.
Than he suddenly stopped that campaign and moved it to another place with minimal payment rewards.
It is not good to create fake picture in competition with other managers, and for me this is not ethical.
I dont have anything against Royse and I wish him all best, but i think he is making to many mistakes in his work as a manager.

[1714252814]

1714252814

[1714252814]

1714252814

[1714252814]

1714252814

[digaran]

I was not member of recent campaigns managed by Royse, but I am little surprised how he was handling things recently.
He knew that mixer campaigns are not going to be allowed next year in forum but he increased rewards with unrealistic high payment rates to make his campaign highest paid and to attract good members.
Than he suddenly stopped that campaign and moved it to another place with minimal payment rewards.
It is not good to create fake picture in competition with other managers, and for me this is not ethical.
I dont have anything against Royse and I wish him all best, but i think he is making to many mistakes in his work as a manager.

I can say he is a bit busy managing several campaigns, but please don't bring up ethics here, in case you are oblivious about the world, half of the population is undergoing a modern slavery system and the other half is like the sheeple, they just live for the sake of living. This is how the market works, you try different approaches to stay in the competition otherwise you'd lose. In case you haven't read the terms of his campaigns, better read them again, he has not violated any of them. Besides, this is not a real job, this has been a known fact that sig campaigns are temporary side bonuses.

And you have no idea how sad and unpleasant it is for me to see some people might lose their only income and have nothing to bring for their table in their house.
But you must drop this "unethical" agenda, it doesn't look good.

[AB de Royse777]

I was not member of recent campaigns managed by Royse, but I am little surprised how he was handling things recently.
He knew that mixer campaigns are not going to be allowed next year in forum but he increased rewards with unrealistic high payment rates to make his campaign highest paid and to attract good members.
Than he suddenly stopped that campaign and moved it to another place with minimal payment rewards.
It is not good to create fake picture in competition with other managers, and for me this is not ethical.
I dont have anything against Royse and I wish him all best, but i think he is making to many mistakes in his work as a manager.

Thank you, I appreciate the criticism greatly. It allows me to become better and serves my clients even better.

With the coming rule that will be enforced from January 1st, things are changing fast on the forum. I think we all agree with that.
Every project who have huge marketing budget wants the best out of their spending. They want aggressive marketing to stand out of the crowd. Only managers can understand it.

[banned mixer] is a team who have massive marketing budget, at least this is the impression I have from them.
Over $7,500 (0.2900 BTC) spent on the review campaigns.
Around $1,000 spent on signature and avatar contest.
Over $18,500 (0.5000 BTC) already sent to me for signature campaign.
Over $26,000 (I assume 0.7440 BTC) to some specific members (some of them refunded some as you know).

No doubt, [banned mixer] is the brand who are going to be the most unfortunate project on Bitcointalk community. They already spent a lot of money but when it was time to start receiving the benefits, a massive change in the rule messed up the initial plan that was set to execute. Things started to change and we had to make many changes, many business calls (calculated risks) - together or even alone myself as their campaign manager.

In general, I ensure the maximum ROI for my clients. Many of my clients have big budget but that does not mean that I always suggest them to spend big. My goal is to balance the spending and the return of the spending, which allows my clients to become top of their niche.

As a campaign manager of [banned mixer], my job is to minimize the damage that has already done, give the most so that they can stay in the crypto ecosystem for many coming months and years to become one of the top and reliable mixers. There are no doubt that [banned mixer] team have what it takes to be the best too.

Regarding highest paying and minimal paying criticism? Consider a business (guess it's a Smartphone brand) wants to expand their business.
Option A: India
Over 1.43 Billion population, density P/Km² 481
Option B: Philippines
Over 117.35 Million population, density P/Km² 394

It's not only the audience but there are many factors involved when you are planning for marketing a brand. Factors like economic, regulatory, audience knowledge, competition, social, many others but let's make it simple for you. If you only consider the audience, will you suggest your clients to have a marketing budget and strategy that will be the same for India and Philippines? It seems you will. Good luck for the brand you are going to work for, I hope the best for you.

As a campaign manager, I will suggest my clients to spend even below 5% of the marketing budget they already planned for India and order my team to work 4x harder in this project.

Thanks for having me in this topic.

Cheers,

[digaran]

As a campaign manager, I will suggest my clients to spend even below 5% of the marketing budget they already planned for India and order my team to work 4x harder in this project.

Thanks for having me in this topic.

Cheers,

Thanks for confirming my point, you are professionally ethical and loyal to the industry, aka a part of modern slavery machine, now I see why people talk about ethics here, and why I had my guard up against them was because of the fact that I considered them unethical creatures only caring for money no matter the source, but now I understand you are truly a monster among humans, you even took advantage of a wounded puppy like me and tried to under pay me just to please your clients as if we are some soulless tools, the end justifies the means, right?

Please note that, if I respect 20 people in this community, you are definitely one of them, and I have no grudges against you, also what I said on tumbler's thread was my humanity calling you incompetent, while in the eyes of a business man, you are a perfect and successful partner to have.  But look at US enslaving Chinese for their profit, look where China is and where US is today.
Ok enough of this political bs, good luck mate.😉

[NotATether]

[banned mixer] is a team who have massive marketing budget, at least this is the impression I have from them.
Over $7,500 (0.2900 BTC) spent on the review campaigns.
Around $1,000 spent on signature and avatar contest.
Over $18,500 (0.5000 BTC) already sent to me for signature campaign.
Over $26,000 (I assume 0.7440 BTC) to some specific members (some of them refunded some as you know).

No doubt, [banned mixer] is the brand who are going to be the most unfortunate project on Bitcointalk community. They already spent a lot of money but when it was time to start receiving the benefits, a massive change in the rule messed up the initial plan that was set to execute. Things started to change and we had to make many changes, many business calls (calculated risks) - together or even alone myself as their campaign manager.

I can understand where you're coming from a bit, but in a different context, since I was about to buy thousands of dollars worth of link placements before my website got suspended.

Sometimes unforeseen events mess up the planning so people should take reasonable precautions to deal with the ones they know about so they won't become a problem later.

[GazetaBitcoin]

I was asked to make the pay rate $14 per post which I could do very easily

O M G Royse runs best paying campaign! Oh wait...

Considering the new rules that will be applied from January 1st, the decision has been made that we will end the campaign on Bitcointalk, and it's effective from this announcement.

The great manager Royse managed to run the best paying campaign. For 10 days. Hooray!

I might run a signature campaign with 2 Legendaries for one week paying 25$ per post (up to 15 posts) and call it "the highest paying campaign".

I might run a signature campaign with only 1 user; and not even Legendary, but just Jr. Member, paying 30$/post (up to 1 post) and call it "the highest paying campaign", since I'd pay more than you and even more than Royse, lol. And if I'd want to look even more eccentric, I could run it also for 11 days, thus it would become also "the longest best paying campaign".

[Plaguedeath]

Than he suddenly stopped that campaign and moved it to another place with minimal payment rewards.
It is not good to create fake picture in competition with other managers, and for me this is not ethical.

I feel like there's a loophole in signature campaign.

Someone can run a campaign, mention the total funds on escrow (giving an illusion for people to think the campaign has x amount that can afford to run for x weeks) or even saying the campaign will run for long term. But after few week(s) the campaign stopped since the owner asking to stop, even though the escrowed funds has still a lot money.

But there was stated "the manager/owner reserve the right to bla bla bla", so it makes people can't do anything because their money their rules.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

O M G Royse runs best paying campaign! Oh wait...

<...>

The great manager Royse managed to run the best paying campaign. For 10 days. Hooray!

I don't know why you want to add fuel to the fire with that ironic tone.

I feel like there's a loophole in signature campaign.

Someone can run a campaign, mention the total funds on escrow (giving an illusion for people to think the campaign has x amount that can afford to run for x weeks) or even saying the campaign will run for long term. But after few week(s) the campaign stopped since the owner asking to stop, even though the escrowed funds has still a lot money.

But there was stated "the manager/owner reserve the right to bla bla bla", so it makes people can't do anything because their money their rules.

Yes, there may be a loophole, as you mention, but so far it has not been used in the way you mean. What has happened now is because of the ban that starts on 1 January. As far as I know, apart from this exception, when funds went to escrow it was for campaign spending.

[AB de Royse777]

Things started to change and we had to make many changes, many business calls (calculated risks) - together or even alone myself as their campaign manager.

When I manage a campaign, many times I make many hard calls when it's necessary.

But after few week(s) the campaign stopped since the owner asking to stop, even though the escrowed funds has still a lot money.

If we have a specific campaign in mind which in this case seems like [banned mixer]. It was not the owner, it was me who made the call.

But there was stated "the manager/owner reserve the right to bla bla bla", so it makes people can't do anything because their money their rules.

You sound like every manager and every project that wants to publish their business in this community owe you something. Working in a signature campaign is not a contract job, it's not your human right, it's a privilege you enjoy if you are chosen.

O M G Royse runs best paying campaign! Oh wait...

<...>

The great manager Royse managed to run the best paying campaign. For 10 days. Hooray!

I don't know why you want to add fuel to the fire with that ironic tone

Very soon everyone will have some light about it. I promise but not in this topic.

[GazetaBitcoin]

I don't know why you want to add fuel to the fire with that ironic tone.

I merely stated a fact with which he brags himself: he managed the best paying campaign for 10 days. Is there anything incorrect about this statement? The best payment lasted only 10 days (4-14 December). I believe this must be appreciated properly (this is why I also wrote that "Hooray!"):



Then 1miau stated that he could hire 2 Legendaries for one week paying 25$ per post (up to 15 posts) and that would become best paying campaign. Is there anything incorrect about this statement?
Finally, I said that if I'd pay someone with 30$/post (for max 1 post) for wearing a signature advertising me, that would make my campaign as best paying campaign. Is there anything incorrect about this?

[notblox1]

Thank you, I appreciate the criticism greatly. It allows me to become better and serves my clients even better.

You wrote so many words but you didnt said anything important or reply to my post, and you knew at that time that mixers will stop on January 1.
It is not good to temporary increase rates to make it highest ever just to attract good members, and than cancel the campaign in next week.
You are giving false image and bad promotion to service you are advertising.
Another thing you are doing is often changing and reducing payrates inside the same campaign, to everyone or to individuals.

If you only consider the audience, will you suggest your clients to have a marketing budget and strategy that will be the same for India and Philippines? It seems you will. Good luck for the brand you are going to work for, I hope the best for you.

Unrelated with anything I said, and to my criticism, but do whatever you want.
I am sure many other members would say the same thing as me but they dont want to say anything against managers.

The great manager Royse managed to run the best paying campaign. For 10 days. Hooray!

Worst strategy ever, and it was done on purpose like this  

I merely stated a fact with which he brags himself: he managed the best paying campaign for 10 days. Is there anything incorrect about this statement? The best payment lasted only 10 days (4-14 December)

Most people who was not accepted in that campaign should be very lucky considering everything that happened.
Receive the payment,  than be without any payment, and blame it all on mixer ban, perfect crime

[GazetaBitcoin]

It is not good to temporary increase rates to make it highest ever just to attract good members, and than cancel the campaign in next week.
You are giving false image and bad promotion to service you are advertising.
Another thing you are doing is often changing and reducing payrates inside the same campaign, to everyone or to individuals. [...]
I am sure many other members would say the same thing as me but they dont want to say anything against managers.

notblox1, be careful with what you dare to say upfront to Royse.

The great manager Royse managed to run the best paying campaign. For 10 days. Hooray!

Worst strategy ever, and it was done on purpose like this  

Yes, now he wears the crown of manager of best paying campaign. Maybe 1miau will de-throne him though

[LoyceV]

I feel like there's a loophole in signature campaign.

Someone can run a campaign, mention the total funds on escrow (giving an illusion for people to think the campaign has x amount that can afford to run for x weeks) or even saying the campaign will run for long term. But after few week(s) the campaign stopped since the owner asking to stop, even though the escrowed funds has still a lot money.

But there was stated "the manager/owner reserve the right to bla bla bla", so it makes people can't do anything because their money their rules.

That's not a loophole, it's the risk of doing any business without contractual agreement.
If you don't want that, don't join the campaign. Or make a custom deal.

[notblox1]

notblox1, be careful with what you dare to say upfront to Royse.

I am always going to criticize any member, including managers, if I think they are doing something bad, like I did before few times.
If they want to put me on some blacklist for doing that, they can do it, but this will show that I was correct, and I am not afraid to say what I feel is right.

[GazetaBitcoin]

If they want to put me on some blacklist for doing that, they can do it, but this will show that I was correct, and I am not afraid to say what I feel is right.

Don't be surprised if you'll see your name on a list soon (whatever that list may be) A list exists already and it's growing (pretty fast I'd say).

I will avoid replying to JollyGood, airfinex, Poker Player, decodx and GazetaBitcoin

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I merely stated a fact <...>

Look, I know a woman who is very ugly. I find it unpleasant to look at her face. If I were to say to her face: 'But you're ugly! I'm disgusted to look at you', I would be stating a fact. By this I mean to exemplify that there are contexts in which it is not reasonable to state certain facts, and above all to state them in a certain way.

What was Royse777's reaction? To say that he is going to counterattack, obviously.

The way you said things was not conciliatory, that's obvious.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Look, I know a woman who is very ugly. I find it unpleasant to look at her face. If I were to say to her face: 'But you're ugly! I'm disgusted to look at you', I would be stating a fact. By this I mean to exemplify that there are contexts in which it is not reasonable to state certain facts, and above all to state them in a certain way.

That's a matter of perception. At same time, maybe that woman would appear as very beautiful to someone else. But the above information is pure statistics: that campaign lasted 10 days with that high payment.

What was Royse777's reaction? To say that he is going to counterattack, obviously.

Of course. As any wise man would do when confronted with the truth /s Like this one.

The way you said things was not conciliatory, that's obvious.

What should I conciliate with Royse? I was not in his campaign; I was not affected by his decision to (pick-?)pocket the funds. However, I can not stay blind to such actions. I just stated once that he should show more respect to other campaign managers, especially to old ones (like Hhampuz) -- is that wrong? and that constantly bragging himself is only making him to look ridiculous -- is that wrong?.

So he disrespects other campaign managers; he brags himself around with how much money he has (and which do not belong to him); he brags himself for running best paying campaign (which lasted 10 days); he does not pay the participants; he constantly looks for various conflicts (like Royse v Poker Player; Royse v icopress (+ the fact that he locked that thread suddenly, with no explanation); Royse v TL (where he did not even realize that he's complaining for a feedback left by a non-DT user, which does not influence his Trust score anyhow); Royse v JG... + his involvement with a proven scam; + the fact that he was banned for sending unsolicited PMs (LOL!)) -- and then I should conciliate with him? Conciliate what?

For the sake of the discussion, logically speaking, he should conciliate with some people: with those which he did not pay, for example. Or with those he disrespected. Or with those he disturbed by sending them so many unsolicited PMs that they could not stand anymore and reported them.

[examplens]

I feel like there's a loophole in signature campaign.

That's not a loophole, it's the risk of doing any business without contractual agreement.
If you don't want that, don't join the campaign. Or make a custom deal.

There can't be a loophole here, campaign signatures are not a rule of the forum, but a possibility. Each campaign has its own rules and they are determined by the owner & manager. And no one is obliged to participate in sig. campaign.

I merely stated a fact with which he brags himself: he managed the best paying campaign for 10 days. Is there anything incorrect about this statement?

Every manager does what he thinks is best and everyone will praise his campaigns and the way he runs them. It is quite to be expected that they claim that their campaign is the best, the most paid, the most...
I think that this is not only the case with managers but in almost every business.

Another thing you are doing is often changing and reducing payrates inside the same campaign, to everyone or to individuals.

This is not unique to one specific manager, I have seen similar cases in several campaigns. Here, for example, LoyceV had a special deal compared to the others in the last couple of campaigns. It is obvious to everyone and no one is discussing or asking about the conditions, why would we start such a discussion here?
Again, if you don't like someone's way of doing business, you simply ignore their offers.

Most people who was not accepted in that campaign should be very lucky considering everything that happened.
Receive the payment,  than be without any payment, and blame it all on mixer ban, perfect crime

Closing a campaign is not unusual and until now it has not been the practice for managers to urgently secure a place in a new campaign for participants from a closed campaign. OK, it's not a bad thing, but there's no need to make too much drama about it.

I should conciliate with him? Conciliate what?

Maybe it's time for you to create a new topic in reputation, "Should Royse777 ...something...?"

[notblox1]

Again, if you don't like someone's way of doing business, you simply ignore their offers.

Are you hired by Royse to defend him because you are in one of his campaigns or you are doing it for free?
I saw that you are really trying to talk about campaigns from other managers when you dont think something is right, but you obviously have to agree with everything Royse is doing.
Maybe he accepted you in other forum to continue with mixer campaign also, so you feel that you have to defend him.

Closing a campaign is not unusual and until now it has not been the practice for managers to urgently secure a place in a new campaign for participants from a closed campaign. OK, it's not a bad thing, but there's no need to make too much drama about it.

This was not normal at all and dont try to make it look like it was.
He did that on purpose, and you got caught in his net, now enjoy  

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Look, I'm not going to get into an endless argument with you because it's going to look like I'm Royse777's personal lawyer and that's not it either. The only thing I would like to point out is two things, in the rest of what you have said I see that you are full of reasons, but now we will see what reasons he has in the new thread he says he is going to open. As a German fellow forum member says, I think I'm going to grab some popcorn and watch from the sidelines.

What should I conciliate with Royse? I was not in his campaign; I was not affected by his decision to (pick-?)pocket the funds.

What are you talking about, Sinbad's funds? There is an overwhelming majority on the forum who think the best thing for Royse777 to do is not to touch those funds until he has legal advice, as he said. I'm going to take the '(pick-?) pocket' as a joke, but I'm not surprised if he takes it as an offensive one.

<...>Royse v icopress[/url] (+ the fact that he locked that thread suddenly, with no explanation)

I took that precisely as conciliatory, as not wanting to go any further and acknowledging part of the blame, especially after Hhampuz's comment. But of course, I don't see things the way you do.

As for the rest, I repeat, I see that you are full of reasons. Now I'm off to get some popcorn.