Signature Campaigns in the Service Board

[Hhampuz]

I've been running campaigns for a long time now and have learned how to operate within the framework of the rules of this forum. In the past I may have wanted to do payouts in campaigns in a currency other than BTC and by doing so I've had to move my campaigns to the Altcoins board since the BTC service board explicitly required payments to be sent in BTC.

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

[1714976697]

1714976697

[AirtelBuzz]

Bitcoin transaction fees have skyrocketed due to the increase in the price of Bitcoin which has resulted in many people paying huge fees to make Bitcoin transactions.

$200 per week transaction fee seems too much to me.So if people working on your campaign accept Litecoin, USDT instead of Bitcoin, this transaction may not have to be hassled.

[Jawhead999]

You're correct, campaign that isn't paying in Bitcoin should be moved to Altcoins board just like this campaign [FULL] BK8 Signature Campaign | Full Member+ | Up to $100/week . You can still pay using altcoins and stay in service board, but the payrate in Bitcoin must be higher than altcoins.

Now I realize which user you talked about, I'm going to report the thread and see what the result is.

contests.

I'm not exactly sure about the rules for contests (need moderator/admin clarification), but for giveaway it's not allowed if you pay using altcoins.

[digaran]

I guess you could argue that they should move the threads to exchange board, since managers are keeping Bitcoin and paying with altcoin, right? If you want to be technical, but we are not admin/mod, they should tell you what is best, but if it's temporary, why bother?

Note, the important part is that they pay with BTC if you ask, but due to high fees, they also pay with alts.

[Adbitco]

To me I didn't see any reason moving campaign to altcoin section because from the onset it wasn't altcoin based payment. For my suggestion since alternative means of payment is temporary you can still leave your campaign in the service section then your participants can pm you their alternative address for payments but still those addresses can remain hidden in the spreadsheet maybe only their btc address can be public. In every week you will give the values in BTC on spreadsheet while you send them the equivalent in their chosen alternatives of payment to their address. This is just my contribution to remain all your campaign in service sections.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright?

Is not alright, any campaign advertising payment in Bitcoin yet paying their participants with other cryptocurrency only without Bitcoin isn't meant to be on the Bitcoin service board. The thread should be reported and moved to the altcoin service board. Don't campaign have escrow, the escrow funds is meant to cover for everything involving the campaign so when there are high fees they can pay a moderate fee that'll get the transactions confirmed in couple of hours and the participate will have to be okay with that (that's if they can't pay high fee for the minutes confirmations).

The high fees won't last forever so during this periods, that's a scarify we have to give. Staying with Bitcoin in this hard times is a scarify worth all the old times that the fees were low. Switching to a different coin, give that coin utility instead of Bitcoin so if they're not paying in Bitcoin then the projects don't deserve the publicity they're getting from launchings their campaign on the Bitcoin service board.

Bitcoin service board = Bitcoin payment (altcoins can be bonuses)
Altcoin payment irrespective of it been a stablecoin or not = Altcoin service board.

[Helena Yu]

This is tricky one because it just temporary.

Someone could argue the thread shouldn't be moved to altcoin section, but isn't it more fair when the campaign should be placed on the respective place until the end of cycle? when the campaign pays in Monday using Bitcoin, the thread can stay in service board until Sunday. Next Monday when the campaign pays using altcoin, the thread should be moved to altcoin board (depends on how long it's). Then the thread can be moved to service board if the campaign pays in Bitcoin.

you can still leave your campaign in the service section then your participants can pm you their alternative address for payments but still those addresses can remain hidden in the spreadsheet maybe only their btc address can be public.

You're actually tell a trick for manager to make their campaign stay in service board while paying in altcoins, I wonder if someone caught doing this, will he get temporary ban or not.

[Gladitorcomeback]

Paying 200$ fee every week is looking bad , not good for business. If we charge whole fee from participants,it is also not looking fair so we have to find the solution which gives profit to both platform and participants. alts service section is not active like Bitcoin (maybe active after migration), I think Bitcoin service section is still a right decision.

Solution for high fee:

 Ad BTC+LTC both payment optional until btc fee back to normal
Member who choose BTC will bear the sending fee also.

[Oshosondy]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright?

Is not alright, any campaign advertising payment in Bitcoin yet paying their participants with other cryptocurrency only without Bitcoin isn't meant to be on the Bitcoin service board. The thread should be reported and moved to the altcoin service board. Don't campaign have escrow, the escrow funds is meant to cover for everything involving the campaign so when there are high fees they can pay a moderate fee that'll get the transactions confirmed in couple of hours and the participate will have to be okay with that (that's if they can't pay high fee for the minutes confirmations).

The high fees won't last forever so during this periods, that's a scarify we have to give. Staying with Bitcoin in this hard times is a scarify worth all the old times that the fees were low. Switching to a different coin, give that coin utility instead of Bitcoin so if they're not paying in Bitcoin then the projects don't deserve the publicity they're getting from launchings their campaign on the Bitcoin service board.

Bitcoin service board = Bitcoin payment (altcoins can be bonuses)
Altcoin payment irrespective of it been a stablecoin or not = Altcoin service board.

There is nothing not right about it, but if it is just a temporary solution. The fee is too costly. If Hhampuz only wants to do this temporarily until bitcoin mempool become not congest as it is now, he can pay in altcoins like litecoin. Bitcoin developers should do something about this and make transaction fee cheap.

[Husires]

1. If you use Bitcoin sidechain (layer-2) for payments, you will reduce the fees, keep topic in the Bitcoin board, and you can then use L-BTC or LN using a self-custodial wallet in the Bitcoin service board.
2. ask users to make Bi-weekly/monthly payments.

If that is not appropriate, you can move the topic to the altcoin board and invite users who show interest through PM.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

There is nothing not right about it, but if it is just a temporary solution.

There's everything wrong with it dear, I run two Bitcoin campaigns on the forum and still pay in Bitcoin irrespective or the fees and my weekly budget isn't upto that of the supposed campaigns advertising on Bitcoin service board yet paying in altcoin. So because it's a temporary solution will that mean I can post an altcoin discussion on Bitcoin discussion board with the excuse that it's a temporary discussion? My post would be moved immediately to the altcoin discussion board when reported so those paying in altcoin should move their campaign to altcoins service board and when the fees return to normal, that they can pay then they move it back to the Bitcoin service board or pay part in Bitcoin and the rest in altcoins that would be acceptable instead of paying everything in altcoins yet advertising on Bitcoin service board.

Hhampuz is very generous, other managers must not be as generous as he is to pay that much of a fee to get their transaction confirmed, you can pay lesser and still get your transaction confirmed in hours. Unless the forum administrators comes out to say it's okay (which I doubt they'll say so) I don't think it is. How will you feel seeing altcoins projects coming to post their campaign on the th Bitcoin service board and paying in altcoin, that's exactly what the supposed Bitcoin campaigns now paying in altcoin are doing.

[Oshosondy]

1. If you use Bitcoin sidechain (layer-2) for payments, you will reduce the fees, keep topic in the Bitcoin board, and you can then use L-BTC or LN using a self-custodial wallet in the Bitcoin service board.
2. ask users to make Bi-weekly/monthly payments.

Those side chains are also altcoins. Only lightning network payment will be valid but I do not think there are wallets that can give you send to many invoices.

[rat03gopoh]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

I think there is no need to move for campaigns that are already running and have previously paid in bitcoin as a routine. If it is new campaigns, then it should be on the altcoins board. Unless you're in a condition which you able pay participants in bitcoin (as that is the original initiative), you can move it to the services board at that time.

[FatFork]

I know some members are, to put it mildly, averse to 2-layer solutions, but wouldn't the Lightning Network be a viable solution in this case? Are second-layer payment solutions deemed Bitcoin enough to allow campaigns to remain in the Services section?

I think there is no need to move for campaigns that are already running and have previously paid in bitcoin as a routine. If it is new campaigns, then it should be on the altcoins board. Unless you're in a condition which you able pay participants in bitcoin (as that is the original initiative), you can move it to the services board at that time.

This is not good because it would create a loophole, where some campaigns could start paying in btc for, say, only the first week, and then switch to altcoins indefinitely after that.

[uchegod-21]

For my suggestion since alternative means of payment is temporary you can still leave your campaign in the service section then your participants can pm you their alternative address for payments but still those addresses can remain hidden in the spreadsheet maybe only their btc address can be public. In every week you will give the values in BTC on spreadsheet while you send them the equivalent in their chosen alternatives of payment to their address. This is just my contribution to remain all your campaign in service sections.

This suggestion is deceitful and to what end? Is it necessary to begin play a hide and seek game in an obvious situation of skyrocketed bitcoin transaction fees?

The high fees won't last forever so during this periods, that's a scarify we have to give. Staying with Bitcoin in this hard times is a scarify worth all the old times that the fees were low. Switching to a different coin, give that coin utility instead of Bitcoin so if they're not paying in Bitcoin then the projects don't deserve the publicity they're getting from launchings their campaign on the Bitcoin service board.

Well, I think I understand the premise you are coming from. This is a bitcoin problem and switching to altcoins payment means an unsaid failure of bitcoin. It means bitcoin is unable to deliver the promise of  multiple payments with low fee.

If we move to altcoins payment, believe me that it will be in the history that in bitcointalk forum, bitcoin payment failed and they switched to so so alt coin.

From the side of Hhampuz my manager. Moving a thread that has got much exposure in the bitcoin service board it the altcoins board will be a big distraction. I think paying a moderate fee and even if it takes a few days to confirm is fine or you can consider bi weekly payment.

[btc_angela]

You're correct, campaign that isn't paying in Bitcoin should be moved to Altcoins board just like this campaign [FULL] BK8 Signature Campaign | Full Member+ | Up to $100/week . You can still pay using altcoins and stay in service board, but the payrate in Bitcoin must be higher than altcoins.

Now I realize which user you talked about, I'm going to report the thread and see what the result is.

contests.

I'm not exactly sure about the rules for contests (need moderator/admin clarification), but for giveaway it's not allowed if you pay using altcoins.

Yes, our campaign started paying in BTC, however, we switch to USDT as the projects has problems with BTC since last year and in essence it was the right decision (even before the whole mempool congestion). Thus, payment is still weekly.

And correct, if the project is not paying in BTC it should be reported and moved to the altcoins. As for the giveways, it should be in BTC.

[EarnOnVictor]

-snip-
Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

In my experience, a lot of CMs had paid BTC and altcoin together in the past and I don't think there is a place like a "service board" that is designated for altcoin campaigns. Even as it is, it is not that the CMs paying with altcoins will do this permanently, they are doing it temporarily to save their heads for now.

They will surely return fully to BTC when the fee is back to sane amounts. It could be now, it could be tomorrow, nobody knows, so I don't see it as wise for them to be moving their campaign threads between sections. I believe this is right and wise at the same time. You can imagine spending as high as $200 on a campaign weekly just to transfer. That is so gross, to say the least. I advise you to follow suit if you know that LN will not work for your style.

[ajiz138]

You have many campaigns means more than $1000+ for the whole campaign payment fee, this is really not fair for you pack too much spending every week for fees.

There are many said solutions on the lightning network but so far there are still no managers who try to make this payment most of them choose the option on other coins to wait for the btc network fee to drop, but does the campaign thread moved to the altcoin board have a different exposure than on the bitcoin service?

[Helena Yu]

but does the campaign thread moved to the altcoin board have a different exposure than on the bitcoin service?

Isn't that obvious? who's watching the bounties section except bot?

That section is full of spam and it's hard to see a good campaign on there, while in service section, it's a place where many people are waiting to see a new good campaign, contest, offering service etc. Also the big difference is service section has 0.1% chance to be scammed, while in bounties it's 99% chance to be scammed.

[stompix]

My opinion:
- *** those rules
- make a board for forum services only, including signatures, contest, reviews on the forum, ignore the payment options
- everything that requires actions outside the forum keep it in the bounties section
- stop with the stupid non-sense this is paid in doge so must go to this board this is btc move the topic there, waste of time! Seriously!

The whole thing starts to become ridiculous, first we dropped Bitcoin as a reference for payments because it was to volatile and everyone is paying $100, $200 instead of 0.05BTC but still in BTC, now we're finding even payments in BTC impossible also so we switch to altcoins.
Rather than the whole mod team and admin focusing on where this topic goes they should channel their energy to try and pressure a change so the damn network works, that before the whole marketplace will look like Tron or Tether market!

[Shishir99]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

I assume it's all right as long as they do not permanently switch the payment method. But, if they switch the payment method for one week or two weeks of payments and promise to pay in BTC again, then it should be okay. This is just my assumption as I am no one from the officials. The fees have been unrealistic for the last couple of weeks. But, that does not mean a campaign will switch the payment method and they will remain in the BTC service board.

If they switch their payment method permanently, they should be moved to the altcoins bounty section. They shouldn't have any problem doing it because there are several campaigns running signature campaigns on the bounty board.

[ajiz138]

Isn't that obvious? who's watching the bounties section except bot?

That section is full of spam and it's hard to see a good campaign on there, while in service section, it's a place where many people are waiting to see a new good campaign, contest, offering service etc. Also the big difference is service section has 0.1% chance to be scammed, while in bounties it's 99% chance to be scammed.

If in the bounty section it is obvious that there will be a lot of spam bots, I mean just like the BK8 campaign which is on the Marketplace board (Altcoin) I don't think there is much spam there, still not many people visit this board.

I assume it's all right as long as they do not permanently switch the payment method. But, if they switch the payment method for one week or two weeks of payments and promise to pay in BTC again, then it should be okay. This is just my assumption as I am no one from the officials. The fees have been unrealistic for the last couple of weeks. But, that does not mean a campaign will switch the payment method and they will remain in the BTC service board.

If they switch their payment method permanently, they should be moved to the altcoins bounty section. They shouldn't have any problem doing it because there are several campaigns running signature campaigns on the bounty board.

I don't think the network problem will subside immediately after 1 week or 2 weeks it takes months to wait for the bitcoin network to normalize, especially now that ordinal is hype, the transaction stack will be larger which causes fees to be high.

Even though this is only temporary we don't know if the mods will tolerate it? And still when the manager makes a payment on altcoin then the mod will automatically move it to the altcoin board.

This is also according to personal assumptions, but I doubt that the thread will remain in the bitcoin service while if the payment uses altcoins.

[Adbitco]

For my suggestion since alternative means of payment is temporary you can still leave your campaign in the service section then your participants can pm you their alternative address for payments but still those addresses can remain hidden in the spreadsheet maybe only their btc address can be public. In every week you will give the values in BTC on spreadsheet while you send them the equivalent in their chosen alternatives of payment to their address. This is just my contribution to remain all your campaign in service sections.

This suggestion is deceitful and to what end? Is it necessary to begin play a hide and seek game in an obvious situation of skyrocketed bitcoin transaction fees?

Well I didn't see it that way because some of the managers has already suggested for alternatives and yet their campaign didn't leave the service section to other board. Do we call that deceptive method? No but is just a way to facilitate the way of payment, just imagine having a pending transaction for a week or more how would you feel at this point. Okay suggesting of increase network fees, how well are you to keep paying outrageous fee and from whom expenses. Maybe you think that but to me i can't say but if that is a wrong way then it's left for the manager to chose what is best for him and to help foster payment methods.

[Findingnemo]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

It shouldn't exist in the service board if they switched to any payment option other than Bitcoin whether it's a temporary switch or permanent.

But to bypass this, they can ask for an optional payment network in case the user is willing to accept in USDT instead of BTC and can switch back to BTC whenever they want.

[pakhitheboss]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post
 campaigns and contests.

Ideally if it is not about Bitcoin payment then it shouldn't be present on the Service board. Regardless of it being a temporary issue or not, any other payment option due to the current situation, the thread should be shifted to altcoin board.

I did read a few replies about LN on this topic, it is a good option but the question that comes to my mind can LN wallets handle such a big amount that goes into $1000 every week or more. Well, it would be nice, if anyone here who can give the right information. The problem with LN is that a lot of campaign members don't think it as an alternate option to Bitcon payment. In current situation it should be considered as an alternative.

I won't think anyone likes what is presently happening with the transaction fee. When will this network congestion end we all are uncertain. Then why not utilize a secondary option like LN in the meantime, if it allows.

[libert19]

Why not pay participants in lightning BTC thus continue posting campaigns in services board? They can always use instant ex like fixedfloat to instantly convert to other cryptos.

[Hhampuz]

Why not pay participants in lightning BTC thus continue posting campaigns in services board? They can always use instant ex like fixedfloat to instantly convert to other cryptos.

I currently have about 300 users in total in my campaigns, opening channels for all of the campaigns and getting everyone to get on LN to accept payments seems like an incredibly annoying endeavour and not something I'd be too interested in doing right now. To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

[Mpamaegbu]

Is not alright, any campaign advertising payment in Bitcoin yet paying their participants with other cryptocurrency only without Bitcoin isn't meant to be on the Bitcoin service board. The thread should be reported and moved to the altcoin service board.

This may not be my forte but apart from the campaign thread getting more visibility if Bitcoin paying campaigns stay in the  dedicated section for it and altcoin campaigns less, I know there's no other advantage since participants can still post anywhere in the forum and their posts counted. I don't know of any other advantage it has from the lens of an outsider that I see it or is (are) there?

BTW, I know we had this similar issue here some years ago and the manager (I can't remember the user again) who was asked to move his thread to the altcoin bounty section refused, citing certain rules in the forum that backed him up and that was how the matter was relaxed. For me, I don't think it's a big deal whether it's set up in altcoin section or not, provided hunters know where to look for campaigns.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

IMO, by following the rules of the service board, which are that signature payouts should be made in Bitcoin only, if any manager switches to paying with any other coin except Bitcoin, the right thing to do is move the thread to the bounty section; perhaps it's only for a temporary time until the fee has normalized, then it can be moved back to the service board.

My opinion:
- *** those rules
- make a board for forum services only, including signatures, contest, reviews on the forum, ignore the payment options
- everything that requires actions outside the forum keep it in the bounties section
- stop with the stupid non-sense this is paid in doge so must go to this board this is btc move the topic there, waste of time! Seriously!

As @stompix said above, the question is: how many clicks would it take to create a "forum service board" for every forum service, like signatures, etc., that neglects which payment method should be used or not? It is better that way.

If the admin also wants to further segregate it, there should be a sub-board for the forum service board. The sub-boards could be "bitcoin payments service," "fait payments service," and "altcoin payments service."

[LoyceV]

I always thought the Services board allowed 2 kinds of services: services paid in Bitcoin, and services related to Bitcoin (such as my old Pretty Addy Giveaway). By that logic, one could argue a signature campaign for a Bitcoin-related service is allowed, even if it doesn't pay in Bitcoin.

I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees

And that's only your end: it's probably costs 5 times more than that if (all) your campaign participants want to move or consolidate the Bitcoins.
Alternatively, you can consider paying less frequently. Pay every other week, or once a month. As long as users trust you and aren't in a rush, that can work.
LN isn't really practical: it can't easily do "send to many", it often has problems finding a route, and it's more difficult to keep a paper trail (although that could be considered a benefit for privacy).

I hate it, but Bitcoin is quite useless for "small" payments lately.

I currently have about 300 users in total in my campaigns, opening channels for all of the campaigns and getting everyone to get on LN to accept payments seems like an incredibly annoying endeavour and not something I'd be too interested in doing right now.

This sounds like something that needs an automated payment setup.

[Faisal2202]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

I was also having the same question because my manager also changed the type of token from BTC to LTC, well, I think there is a catch behind it and that is LTC is also a fork of BTC and a few days ago I saw a post where the OP was asking BRC-20 tokens to be referred as alts or BTC ones' because many people are talking about BRC-20 tokens and these topics created on BTC discussions and are not moved to alt discussion which means they are ok to stay there.

This would also mean, if you guys would change the payment from BTC to any other fork, then it might also be ok with it. But I don't know sure for it as it is just my theory that I have observed and only the moderators would give you the right answers to it.

[Renampun]

Why not pay participants in lightning BTC thus continue posting campaigns in services board? They can always use instant ex like fixedfloat to instantly convert to other cryptos.

I currently have about 300 users in total in my campaigns, opening channels for all of the campaigns and getting everyone to get on LN to accept payments seems like an incredibly annoying endeavour and not something I'd be too interested in doing right now. To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

I have 2 suggestions;
1. paying 50% altcoins + 50% more in the form of bitcoin but paid once a month to your campaign participants

2. provide BTC payments directly through the site platform you are working with

High fees are very annoying for you as a campaign manager, and there are many participants who still depend on their income from the weekly Bitcoin payments they receive, to be honest, it's really hard in your current position.

[mindrust]

I wouldn't mind taking reputable alts like doge, ltc or xmr as payments... (first 2 is preferred) Doge is especially cheap af to make transactions and it is relatively stable among the alts. Apparently bitcoin is on the way of destroying itself and i don't see why we should suffer the consequences. Btc will eventually smarten up and fix its problems but time is also money. If you start paying in alts, nobody will question your decision imo. Right now it costs more than  $10 (~$12.5) to be included in the next btc block while it costs one fifth of a cent in the dogechain...

[electronicash]

Why not pay participants in lightning BTC thus continue posting campaigns in services board? They can always use instant ex like fixedfloat to instantly convert to other cryptos.

I currently have about 300 users in total in my campaigns, opening channels for all of the campaigns and getting everyone to get on LN to accept payments seems like an incredibly annoying endeavour and not something I'd be too interested in doing right now. To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

I have 2 suggestions;
1. paying 50% altcoins + 50% more in the form of bitcoin but paid once a month to your campaign participants

2. provide BTC payments directly through the site platform you are working with

High fees are very annoying for you as a campaign manager, and there are many participants who still depend on their income from the weekly Bitcoin payments they receive, to be honest, it's really hard in your current position.

why not just tell them to get their BTC in a month? so there will be an accumulation and he will only spend $200 for a transaction fee in a month. he'd save a lot with this agreement though some may not agree. but give the participants the option to ask for stablecoin if they like. BUSD seems to have the lowest fees.

i'm sure the stablecoin will be a good option but Hhampuz campaign thread will also be moved to the altcoin/bounty which i think is not what he likes.

[_BlackStar]

To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

Of course - but ask your participants to be more patient in waiting for confirmation when congestion becomes worse. You can still make adjustments by paying each participant with USDT or anything else that has a low transaction fee - but keeping a campaign or contest thread on the service board seems hard when payments switch to altcoins.

Another approach is that bi-weekly or monthly payments may be worth considering versus high-fees weekly payments. But you've the ball - just do it or nothing, but keeping thread on the service board will only cost you more transaction fees during these congestion.

[yahoo62278]

To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

Of course - but ask your participants to be more patient in waiting for confirmation when congestion becomes worse. You can still make adjustments by paying each participant with USDT or anything else that has a low transaction fee - but keeping a campaign or contest thread on the service board seems hard when payments switch to altcoins.

Another approach is that bi-weekly or monthly payments may be worth considering versus high-fees weekly payments. But you've the ball - just do it or nothing, but keeping thread on the service board will only cost you more transaction fees during these congestion.

Some participants depend on the money weekly, so you have to consider the people as well when making a decision to go biweekly on payments. Most should be fine with it, but I'm sure some would still complain.

[The Cryptovator]

I partially agree with Stompix, but a mix of the Bitcoin service section and the altcoin service section would look more spammy. Signature campaigns play a major role in keeping active on the forum; honestly, we can't ignore that. So I think it would be better to add a section for signature campaigns beside the service section. It doesn't matter what the payment method is, actually. I don't see a reason to force companies or participants to run campaigns through Bitcoin. So let companies decide how they want to pay and open a section only for the signature campaign. But payment should be held through established coins, not IDO coins; otherwise, new projects signature campaigns will create spam there. All other services should remain as it is.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Bitcoin transaction fees have skyrocketed due to the increase in the price of Bitcoin which has resulted in many people paying huge fees to make Bitcoin transactions.

I'm not sure that's correct--fees are up because there are a lot of transactions vying for a spot in the next block, not necessarily because the price has increased.  In other words, it takes more sats/byte to get a quick confirmation than it did prior to the price exploding, but said explosion isn't necessarily the reason.  Someone please correct me if I'm way off base.

That isn't the point of the thread, however.  OP, you got your answer already and even though that's true, I have to say it'd be so much easier financially if campaigns paid out in a crypto like LTC or something similar simply because the network fees are nearly always much lower--but yep, that's the way Theymos wants all of this organized.  It might not make complete sense, but we're all just peasants in his fiefdom.  

I partially agree with Stompix, but a mix of the Bitcoin service section and the altcoin service section would look more spammy. Signature campaigns play a major role in keeping active on the forum; honestly, we can't ignore that. So I think it would be better to add a section for signature campaigns beside the service section.

Not a bad idea.  In fact, it's not the first time I've seen it suggested--and given the fact that the suggestion can't go anywhere without Theymos acting on it, I wouldn't plan on a new section for campaigns. 

C'mon, Theymos!  This would be a good change to make and wouldn't be hard to do or require more moderation.

[Ultegra134]

Some participants depend on the money weekly, so you have to consider the people as well when making a decision to go biweekly on payments. Most should be fine with it, but I'm sure some would still complain.

Well, that's one point, I personally wouldn't mind too much, I'd be okay with it if there wasn't any other option available. Perhaps some users could volunteer for biweekly payments, although this sounds a little complicated, either all users or none is way more efficient.

I agree with @stompix on this one, all signature campaigns should be posted in one section, the altcoin section is a mess with the bounty campaigns and the hundreds newbies posting there. Even if there is a campaign posted there, I doubt that the announcement thread will get 1/3 of the total views it would receive in the service board.

[Woodie]

Perhaps this calls for a few changes to the forums structure like pushing signatures to their own dedicated board asap, but if a project contains other marketing packages such as Twitter X advertising, YouTube reviews etc then these will have to go to the bounty board as they fit the profile...

And by the way, this just proves there is a loophole here...escrow could hold funds in bitcoins, and payrates are quoted in BTC then I don't see a reason for moving this to the altcoin section,  besides I don't think moving the sig thread could affect the service either as these are launched & running already..& cutting service fees should be the agenda in saving and managing available resources.

[dkbit98]

Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

Crazy fees these days and I think we are just getting started, so better think about some longer term solution for lower fees, maybe using Lightning, Liquid, or other layer2 solution that can be considered as Bitcoin, not altcoin.
I don't think it's good to use anything that looks like bitcoin on binance chain, tron and other centralized blockchains.

There is L-BTC on Liquid that can be considered as 1:1 with Bitcoin, but they also have L-USDT on same network, and transactions are confidential.

This is the current state of Liquid network on mempool.space, and fees are minimal:
https://liquid.network/

[wallet4bitcoin]

This is a sensitive concern, although campaigns have been launched in services for Bitcoin as payment, I don't see the need for such campaigns to still remain there if they veer off the cause.

If for reasons of gas fees these campaigns decides to pay in Altcoins, they should be moved to altcoins for orderliness. Although, it is not a function of their own making to want to seek alternative paying currency either than Bitcoin but their hands are tied.
 This is a forum and we all should ensure decorum at all times

[libert19]

...but give the participants the option to ask for stablecoin if they like. BUSD seems to have the lowest fees.

i'm sure the stablecoin will be a good option but Hhampuz campaign thread will also be moved to the altcoin/bounty which i think is not what he likes.

I personally find BUSD unreliable, better stick with usdt/usdc, bsc/polygon/optimism have cheapest transfer fees.

BTW, imagine if Bitcointalk went to use dogecoin for signature bounty payments, do you think it would make to the news headlines?

"Bitcointalk starts using dogecoin for bounty payments, dogecoin surges". Lol.

[Little Mouse]

I currently have about 300 users in total in my campaigns, opening channels for all of the campaigns and getting everyone to get on LN to accept payments seems like an incredibly annoying endeavour and not something I'd be too interested in doing right now. To be honest I'd probably prefer to pay $100-$150 out of pocket to cover tx fees rather than that, lol.

On top of that, no more than 50% user are familiar with LN. Out of that 50%, only half will be interested to get paid, maybe. I have asked for opinion on LN and the outcome was a "NO" from the discussion I have observed.

[yhiaali3]

Everyone is suffering from the unbearably high fees for Bitcoin, not just campaign managers but also campaign participants.

Every week I struggle to transfer Bitcoin from the wallet where I receive campaign payments to an exchange, this has become a lot of meaningless fees.

In my opinion, it is not wrong to change payment from Bitcoin to one of the stablecoins temporarily until the fees decrease, and during this temporary period I do not mind that campaigns remain on the Bitcoin Service board.

[mindrust]

There is another solution, most campaigns don’t allow legacy addresses (starts with 1…) as a payment address but the biggest crypto exchange in the world (which is binance) don’t offer a segwit deposit address. (Starts with either 3… or bc1…) If I could take my payment to an exchange address then the problem would be solved for me since i can convert my coins to my favorite alt but of course it doesn’t solve the problem for the campaign manager.

I think moving the campaign to altcoin/bounty section isn’t as bad as it sounds. Maybe do it as a temporary precaution then go back to paying in btc when the situation resolves.

[ABCbits]

1. If you use Bitcoin sidechain (layer-2) for payments, you will reduce the fees, keep topic in the Bitcoin board, and you can then use L-BTC or LN using a self-custodial wallet in the Bitcoin service board.
2. ask users to make Bi-weekly/monthly payments.

Those side chains are also altcoins. Only lightning network payment will be valid but I do not think there are wallets that can give you send to many invoices.

I disagree. While sidechain has it's own blockchain, it rely on Bitcoin blockchain. For example, Rootstock sidechain is secured by BTC miners through merge mining mechanism. You also can convert between Bitcoin which located on-chain and side-chain using the network directly by yourself. And LN isn't viable option unless you want to pay few dollars just to open a channel.

[Shishir99]

I don't think the network problem will subside immediately after 1 week or 2 weeks it takes months to wait for the bitcoin network to normalize, especially now that ordinal is hype, the transaction stack will be larger which causes fees to be high.

You can take it as a note. The mempool won't be normal in the next one month. There are 300K unconfirmed transactions. All these transactions need at least 100 blocks. Currently, the mempool can handle around 500K-550K transactions per day. We can verify roughly 140 to 150 blocks each day and each block contains around 3500 transactions on average. So, what if the number of daily transactions decreases to 400K or lower? We will have a free mempool and the fees will be normal again. But, If the number of daily transactions increase more than 500K-550K per day, the mempool will be more congested and the fee will continue to increase.

Here is the recent stats of daily transactions!

[shield132]

I've been running campaigns for a long time now and have learned how to operate within the framework of the rules of this forum. In the past I may have wanted to do payouts in campaigns in a currency other than BTC and by doing so I've had to move my campaigns to the Altcoins board since the BTC service board explicitly required payments to be sent in BTC.

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

Logically, if they switch to altcoin payments, they shouldn't be on Bitcoin Service Board but at the same time, we had signature campaigns where users were tipped on their casino accounts. They shouldn't have been on Bitcoin Service Board because we don't know whether they pay BTC, USDT, LTC or fiat. Also, if we follow logic, campaigns that have pay rates in USD instead of fixed btc paycheck, shouldn't be either in Bitcoin Service Board.

Rules are rules but there should be exceptions to my mind. It is meaningless to move threads back and forth in Altcoins/Bitcoin service board every time we migrate from btc to altcoin payments because of very high transaction fees. At the moment, payments in bitcoins are problems for managers and for participants too because there is no point to pay half of deposit into fees to exchange.

Some participants depend on the money weekly, so you have to consider the people as well when making a decision to go biweekly on payments. Most should be fine with it, but I'm sure some would still complain.

What if company decides to stop signature campaign? Are we going to leave people jobless? We shouldn't treat signature campaigns as a job that pays weekly, it is not a job.

[UmerIdrees]

Solution for high fee:

 Ad BTC+LTC both payment optional until btc fee back to normal
Member who choose BTC will bear the sending fee also.

I do not like solutions that will give the wrong perception that Altcoins are more feasible to use than Bitcoins or like those who prefer the real decentralized digital currency Bitcoin BTC to penalize them to pay the extra fee.

I cannot comment on what should be the alternative to the BTC payment solution as i don't think any perfect solution exists at the moment.
I think the high fee can be borne by the company as they should incorporate this high tx fee in this marketing budget. If not, then we have no option but for the participants to bear the TX cost (dividing the TX amount among the receivers).

[Hhampuz]

Yesterday I did payouts for 4 of my campaigns with fees ranging from $35-$50 and they confirmed in the next couple of blocks. So for now things might be a bit better

[SamReomo]

Most of the signature campaigns and the managers who manage those campaigns have been paying people with Bitcoin but due to network congestion the fees have gone to way high levels and in such times I believe a campaign manager should pay the participants in a alternative crypto-currency.

I believe that crypto-currencies like Lite Coin, Monero, Doge Coin, Tron, or some stable coins can be used as an alternative method of payment in such times. LN is out of question for almost everyone and that's why I won't mention it but it's also a good choice in such times.

As long as the market congestion remains the managers should be allowed to pay with alternative crypto-currencies. I'm more than sure that using the above crypto-currencies as an additional  way of payment in such times won't be against the rules of the service board.

Another important thing a manager can do is to ask the participants that if they want to get paid in Bitcoin and wait for some hours or days because of the huge fees of the network or they may prefer to have their payments in alternative crypto-currencies. I believe both of those approaches should be allowed and they should be applied in such times.

[LoyceV]

Yesterday I did payouts for 4 of my campaigns with fees ranging from $35-$50

I checked this transaction, and it shows the problem: you're paying several people 0.00086820 BTC. Like this user, who now owns 0.0308665 BTC in 24 inputs. If he would want to spend that, he would have been much better off if you would have sent him monthly instead of weekly payments. And it saves you money too!

[Doan9269]

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright? I've been paying roughly $200/week per campaign in fees for the last few weeks and would much rather pay less as long as nothing would change as to where I can post campaigns and contests.

As the rules says, service board is meant for campaigns thst are paying in bitcoin and no other currency aside this, but what am not aware of is the reason why some of these campaigns make payments yet remain on service board without moving their thread to altcoins section, maybe it's because of the temporary payment in other coins in other for them to meet up for the weekly budget for their work before the whole thing come to normal and they returned back to their usual bitcoin payment, but in such cases like this, i will advise for bi weekly or monthly payment if the participants could agree.

[Beparanf]

Yesterday I did payouts for 4 of my campaigns with fees ranging from $35-$50 and they confirmed in the next couple of blocks. So for now things might be a bit better

As a member of your campaign. I don’t mind waiting for days or weeks if you will use a bit lower fee than the current insane fee due to ordinals since I will not spend it immediately due to high fee when I transfer it to exchange.

Participants will understand if they will wait a few days just to get their payment since we have an insane fee and this is not a normal occurrence. Fee usually subsides at some point of the day. You don’t need to pay an insane fee just to make the payment instantly.

[LoyceV]

As a member of your campaign. I don’t mind waiting for days or weeks if you will use a bit lower fee than the current insane fee

That reminds me: choosing a different day for (weekly) payments can also help: Sundays usually have much lower fees.

[OgNasty]

A lot of people will give you stupid solutions to kick the can down the road a bit, but in all honesty this is just a problem with Bitcoin and the draconian leadership that got us here.  We allowed the network to be capped and a patented solution from a private company pushed as the answer instead of allowing the blockchain to scale responsibly.  As a result, and this is the absolute truth...  Bitcoin will eventually price out every use case of it's blockchain due to it's popularity unless this is changed at some point in the future.  I've suggested a dynamic blocksize similar to difficulty adjustments, but this is obviously not the place to discuss blocksize limit solutions.

[joker_josue]

@Hhampuz
I believe that these fees really are not easy for your work. Despite this, I think it would be better to wait a while to receive payment in BTC (because of the fees) than to switch to another type of currency.

The whole thing starts to become ridiculous, first we dropped Bitcoin as a reference for payments because it was to volatile and everyone is paying $100, $200 instead of 0.05BTC but still in BTC, now we're finding even payments in BTC impossible also so we switch to altcoins.
Rather than the whole mod team and admin focusing on where this topic goes they should channel their energy to try and pressure a change so the damn network works, that before the whole marketplace will look like Tron or Tether market!

Here is an excellent point!
Everyone here defends that Bitcoin is the future of money, but then they defend that we should stop using Bitcoin, because we accept the whims of those who want to extort the network, even if they harm it.

LN was still not a solution, because Hhampuz would have to move several thousand dollars every week to LN channels, which in fees would pay the same. I doubt anyone likes to keep thousands of dollars in LN.

If we want to defend Bitcoin, measures must be taken to make the blockchain work at a minimum, and not be held hostage by those who have a lot of money to throw away. Where is the difference between Bitcoin and the traditional fiat system, if it is at the mercy of those with a lot of economic power?

I believe that the Bitcoin community will soon find a solution to try to balance the network. I'm not against anyone who wants to pay a lot in fees, to have their transaction processed faster. But, there has to be something that protects all users. This is to protect the use of the network if it is intended to be actually used on a large scale.

[albon]

I agree here with some opinions and solutions that I consider good to some extent:

1- We should not abandon the Bitcoin network and that payment is not made in altcoins, because by doing so we will be abandoning Bitcoin and not helping in expanding it and using its network on a large scale.

2- Payment can be made any day during the week without specifying a specific day, only when we find lower fees on the network.

3- I have an opinion, and it is possible that many will not agree with me. Instead of the client bearing the fees or Hhampuz bearing them from his pocket, why don’t the campaign payments be reduced slightly so that the participants can bear them? This would depend on the current fees; some participants may bear these fees in one week, and others may bear them in the following weeks. When the fees are distributed among hundreds of participants, it will be as if each person paid a dollar from his pocket in exchange for reducing the current burden on one person. This will not last long in light of finding future solutions to achieve balance in the network.

[tranthidung]

I've been running campaigns for a long time now and have learned how to operate within the framework of the rules of this forum. In the past I may have wanted to do payouts in campaigns in a currency other than BTC and by doing so I've had to move my campaigns to the Altcoins board since the BTC service board explicitly required payments to be sent in BTC.

Now to my question: Fees have been going wild lately and I've already seen some campaigns switch to payments over other networks while still remaining in the Bitcoin Service board (and advertising paying in BTC). Am I to assume this is alright?

I am not against any manager but I assume it is not a right practice and does not match with forum rules and board rules.

To say it is not all right, I will give an example of signature campaigns which run and designed to pay with altcoins like USDT or BUSD. As I saw, those campaigns initially published their Signature campaign threads in Altcoin (Service announcement) board, this is right.

Later, those managers changed campaign rules and payments from stable coins to BTC. Immediately, let me emphasize it's immediately, those threads were moved to Bitcoin (service announcements) board.

I believe we all know reasons to move those threads from Altcoin board to Bitcoin board, instantly because it helps to get better effects from the campaigns, attract better quality posters, better marketing effects for companies.

So, back to this question of Hhampuz, why managers don't instantly move their threads from Bitcoin board to Altcoin board when payment method changed from BTC to LTC or whatever altcoin?

I guess, if it is not moved instantly, it is not all right.

Please check a new thread.

• Signature campaigns paid in stable coins/ top altcoins like USDT, LTC

[shield132]

I think there is nothing wrong with moving on altcoins for a while because Ordinals aren't going to give up and as it seems they are getting more popular. This will only result in increased transaction fees and fees are so high that it is no different from income tax rates. Manager pays a lot to send Bitcoins, participants pay a lot to send Bitcoins or to exchange them. Bitcoin payment is financial lose for everyone today.
I think that before fees go down, we should move on to altcoin payments (for example Litecoin) but all campaigns must be left on Bitcoin Service board.

[Saisher]

I think there is nothing wrong with moving on altcoins for a while because Ordinals aren't going to give up and as it seems they are getting more popular. This will only result in increased transaction fees and fees are so high that it is no different from income tax rates. Manager pays a lot to send Bitcoins, participants pay a lot to send Bitcoins or to exchange them. Bitcoin payment is financial lose for everyone today.
I think that before fees go down, we should move on to altcoin payments (for example Litecoin) but all campaigns must be left on Bitcoin Service board.

I agree many managers are hurting by the transaction fees I don't think this issue will last, many developers will find a way to resolve this issue, this is harming merchants that accept Bitcoin and other platforms as well, we cannot go on like this for many months some managers deduct their participants with the transaction which is ok but imagine the fee that could be saved if it's USDT, Matic or Dogecoin, I hope the admins will grant the wish of many that they allow the thread to remain the Bitcoin service section will accepting altcoins, I don't think this ordinal issue will last long, I have to save my earnings in my wallet for a month before I can send it to our local exchange to trade because the fee will eat up my one-week earnings.

[bluefirecorp_]

Just put a lower fee and have your workers wait for the mempool to clear. Perhaps consider queuing and batching withdraw requests too.

It's not that complex to solve this problem.

Using alt-coin payments in a service for bitcoin would be confusing to say the least.

[NotATether]

I believe that crypto-currencies like Lite Coin, Monero, Doge Coin, Tron, or some stable coins can be used as an alternative method of payment in such times. LN is out of question for almost everyone and that's why I won't mention it but it's also a good choice in such times.

Why is it out of the question? In fact there has never been a better time to use LN.

Right now, you can download a mobile app that will give you a Lightning wallet complete with channels and I believe even a Lightning address, or in the case of desktop you can lease a Lightning Node and then use it via a frontend like LNbits.

None of the altcoins you mentioned are particularly stable, and finding a wallet for each has their own can of worms not to mention exchanging them for Bitcoin later.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Why is it out of the question? In fact there has never been a better time to use LN.

It has never been a better time, but remember that it still is for micro-payments. Weekly payouts can be up to thousands of dollars worth of bitcoin. Plus, there are the economic problems of sending a new invoice every week, needed to be online to receive payment. Then, it is the other transaction fees. I'm pretty sure moving thousands via lightning is neither attractive, maybe worse than on-chain.

Would it violate any rules to opt for payment in altcoin from whoever requests it? I prefer receiving payment in XMR to facilitate the process for myself, my manager and the promoted service. However, I don't want to impose the choice of receiving payouts in XMR on the other participants.

[criptoevangelista]

Wouldn't it be better to make payments every 15 days? or 20 in 20 days?

It might be interesting to change the payment method to a longer term and continue keeping the payment in BTC... or use LN and offer benefits, such as a slightly better payment, even if it is a temporary solution

[OgNasty]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

[Eternad]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

I doubt that giving mailing address is a viable solution to stop abuse because anyone can use drop shipping services or their relatives address to receive the package for them. Using altcoins is still more convenient solution rather than using a physical rewards that will take more days or months to receive depending on the type of courier the sender will use.

Services on Bitcoin or Altcoin doesn’t matter anymore because campaign participants will surely always follow the campaign whatever the location. Even bounty section on altcoins is once become popular when bounty campaign pays high during the 2017 hype.

[criptoevangelista]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

This would only be viable if the campaigns were limited to users from a certain country, in this case we have people from all over the world in subscription campaigns...

I also think there are a lot of people here who prefer to remain completely anonymous.

[sokani]

As the saying goes desperate times calls for desperate measures. The Bitcoin high transaction is really crazy, and I don't see anything wrong with you trying to pay your participants with altcoins while still running your campaigns on the service board. Although some persons might kick against it but this is just a temporary solution and there's no need to move the thread to the altcoin board. The moment transaction fee returns back to normal, you'll revert to Bitcoin.

[FinePoine0]

Usually after a small increase in the price of Bitcoin, Bitcoin transaction fees have increased so much that it is almost impossible to transact. Still have Mempool 200+ Plus. Companies also have trouble transacting here, as Bitcoin transactions do not attract high-fee users.

[Poker Player]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

I doubt that giving mailing address is a viable solution to stop abuse because anyone can use drop shipping services or their relatives address to receive the package for them. Using altcoins is still more convenient solution rather than using a physical rewards that will take more days or months to receive depending on the type of courier the sender will use.

This would only be viable if the campaigns were limited to users from a certain country, in this case we have people from all over the world in subscription campaigns...

I also think there are a lot of people here who prefer to remain completely anonymous.

I doubt if OgNasty was drunk or joking when he said this, but in view of his habit of commenting in threads and not coming back to respond to what is questioned about his comments in them I doubt we will ever know.

Do you mean OgNasty that you want Stake.com, which is banned in the US, to send you campaign payments by snail mail to Arizona?

[NotATether]

Do you mean OgNasty that you want Stake.com, which is banned in the US, to send you campaign payments by snail mail to Arizona?

Unrelated but I hear that Stake have a US operation in stake.us, not sure if that entity is also banned though.

[Z-tight]

Usually after a small increase in the price of Bitcoin, Bitcoin transaction fees have increased so much that it is almost impossible to transact. Still have Mempool 200+ Plus. Companies also have trouble transacting here, as Bitcoin transactions do not attract high-fee users.

This is not totally true, a small increase in the price of BTC doesn't always create a congestion in the network. For example the current high fee rate is not caused by BTC price movement, but by the people who are making ordinal transactions and taking up block space, so if you want a space in a block, you have to pay a high fee and outbid other users.

There are over 350,000 unconfirmed tx's in the network right now, and fee rate for high priority tx's is ~ 90 sat/vByte as i type this.

[OgNasty]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

I doubt that giving mailing address is a viable solution to stop abuse because anyone can use drop shipping services or their relatives address to receive the package for them. Using altcoins is still more convenient solution rather than using a physical rewards that will take more days or months to receive depending on the type of courier the sender will use.

This would only be viable if the campaigns were limited to users from a certain country, in this case we have people from all over the world in subscription campaigns...

I also think there are a lot of people here who prefer to remain completely anonymous.

I doubt if OgNasty was drunk or joking when he said this, but in view of his habit of commenting in threads and not coming back to respond to what is questioned about his comments in them I doubt we will ever know.

Do you mean OgNasty that you want Stake.com, which is banned in the US, to send you campaign payments by snail mail to Arizona?

No.  Stake doesn't have any issues with sending out distributions.  I also don't drink alcohol more than a couple times a year and when I do it's usually on vacation somewhere, not to post on the internet. 

I get that people want to remain anonymous and sending things overseas is costly.  Still cheaper than tx fees at times.  It was just a fun idea as back in 2012 I actually had discussions with a mining pool operator about the possibility of me shipping silver to their miners instead of paying them out BTC for mining rewards.  It would be cool to see something like that finally implemented in some fashion after all these years.

[Mr.right85]

Rather than the whole mod team and admin focusing on where this topic goes they should channel their energy to try and pressure a change so the damn network works, that before the whole marketplace will look like Tron or Tether market!

I think the whole framework to the issue with the network congestion and high fee revolves about this pivot of bringing to the consciousness of miners what this fee is doing to the whole system.
I can't say it's crumbling under low fees but, it was the case that pushed other projects to be built on networks like Ethereum and the we had a shift to other altcoins. The search for low fees.

One thing is for sure though, with high fee causing a shift in the system, it makes it something worth looking at.
While I may not have to support the payment of altcoins for signature campaigns is simply due to the other of things on the forum. It might be temporal but, isn't any less disruptive of the other of things. We might as well see bounty campaigns coming over to get a bit of the service board.

I really wonder how Hhampuz and the rest of the managers who continues to pay in BTC does it and you guys are really championing this time.

[bluefirecorp_]

If Bitcoin network fees get higher than shipping costs, it would make sense to start giving participants physical goods for their signature campaign participation. I think it would be cool and probably help cut down on abuse if people had to give their mailing address to be a part of the campaign. Maybe try shipping some silver?

Why not just send them physical bitcoin wallets? Order some bitcoin cheques from a 3rd party. Load them with cash using low-fee transactions [just put the lowest fee over and over until it goes through to preload a bunch of cheques]. Make payout amounts for people to work toward and then mail them that many checks.

It's almost like cash, but not?

Oh wait, you could just send them the private keys to accounts loaded with funds instead of transferring them via mail...

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

With this latest change, in a good way, of Bitcoin mempools, it is possible for campaign managers to proceed campaign payments with more feasible fee rates like 25 to 30 sat/vbyte.

Ordinals seem to cool down and I don't know when they will come back but probably won't too soon. With coming returns of campaigns back to Bitcoin, I think this discussion can be temporarily closed, before mempools congested with very expensive fee rates again and campaigns make some fluctuative payment methods again.

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC%20(default%20mempool),2d,weight

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

With this latest change, in a good way, of Bitcoin mempools, it is possible for campaign managers to proceed campaign payments with more feasible fee rates like 25 to 30 sat/vbyte.

Ordinals seem to cool down and I don't know when they will come back but probably won't too soon. With coming returns of campaigns back to Bitcoin, I think this discussion can be temporarily closed, before mempools congested with very expensive fee rates again and campaigns make some fluctuative payment methods again.

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC%20(default%20mempool),2d,weight

To get the next block right now you need 60+ sat/vbyte. It still very expensive. Consider a transaction with a few input and a few outputs, you will need to spend over $20 for the transaction.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

To get the next block right now you need 60+ sat/vbyte. It still very expensive. Consider a transaction with a few input and a few outputs, you will need to spend over $20 for the transaction.

I see but it is for very hurry transaction when need to be a tip of mempool. It is cheaper if waiting time is for like 1 hour or a few hours. I know even with fee rate like 50 or 40 sat/vbyte, it is still expensive and I miss times with fee rate like 1 to 3 sat/vbyte too.

However, it is cheaper than in December and managers, companies can afford to spend that fee and campaign participants can support to wait a few hours for a first confirmation. With risk of Ordinals return, managers can use RBF to bump fee later.

[Jessie2121]

I thought whenever the price of Bitcoin goes high investors and traders get to have a happy face, but why is it that since the price of Bitcoin get to hit $40-45k things on the fees became crazy, like the charges has never been the same,why? I never believed we would be having this high fee this period. Now it seems like seeing Bitcoin price going up is just another bad idea and is like nobody has the solution to this issue which in no time if it continues it will ambush business. I just feel for those in campaign, how much are they getting and how much are they paying as fee? Is really discouraging and it will only paint a negative picture that Bitcoin is dead truly.