cryptomus_com why isn't the Sig+Campaign orking properly? What is their purpose?

[Wonder Work]

[CFNP] Cryptomus | Signature Campaign | Accept crypto payments. cryptomus_com is noticing some random aspects of the running signature campaign. The first week of the signature campaign ended on the 7th, but they still need to do something right about it. I wonder why they are not doing everything right; I don't know their idea, but what they do could be better for signature. It reveals a naughty side of the forum.

Hello. We are forced to exclude you from the subscription campaign without payment, as you have violated the terms of the contest regarding prohibited topics.

Thank you for your understanding.

I joined the Cryptomus Signature Campaign and have been accepted to promote the signature. I worked a long week, but I have been told by message that they are kicking me out without paying. I don't see why they are kicking me out. I asked why I was being kicked out, but they didn't reply to me. I don't know why they didn't reply, and I don't even understand their purpose.

Participant Requirements:
- You must be aware of and comply with the rules for participating in subscription campaigns
- Make a minimum of 20 constructive posts per week
- Removing the signature leads to disqualification
- The link in the signature must remain correct and unchanged
- Excluded boards (WO & Serious, Sig Threads, Press, Politics, Games, Off-topic, Bounty)

On the other hand, I read their campaign's rules carefully and posted accordingly. I don't know why they sent me such a message and I couldn't understand it. I have not violated any of their rules.

Please I want you to change my BTC address for payment to bc1q8at53xmtp27cs28m5erlnffzwz5zd9mje75xly
Thank you very much

Dear cryptomus_com Sir, I have given BSC Wallet Address by mistake while applying. This is my BTC Address. Please accept my BTC Address.

BTC Address: bc1qzjmk9hgfkdcnckzdf7walw7lawr5008h5s67td

They accepted 30 people to do this campaign, and from here, we can see that two of them mistakenly gave their BTC address instead of another address. They have posted their BTC address, but they have not updated it. Since they made a mistake, they should have received their BTC address via personal message.  They shared their BTC address in the reply post but didn't update it either.

None of the 30 people have been paid, and only one has posted about it. The first week is over, and the second day of the second week is going on, but they still haven't completed anything well from the previous week. Signature campaigns cannot go on without rules and regulations on what they want to do.

Although they are new, I understand it is a relationship, and they need to know better how to do signature campaigns. They should do it very carefully. I don't know what they are doing or what they are here for, but they should be careful to get these things right if they run this campaign going forward. I am not giving them any bad reports, but what they are doing in the signature campaign of this forum is a bad thing to note and should be properly looked into and fixed.

Wonder Work

[Poker Player]

First, the signature is working properly, what might not be working properly according to what I've read is the signature campaign.

Besides, why do you still wear the signature? You forgot?

It smells fishy but as things stand now we can't do anything.

[Despairo]

There are 28 users get paid, 0 users eligible to get paid, 2 users not eligible to get paid, and one user submitted incorrect address.

List of accepted participants

Tipstar - Paid
DiMarxist - Paid
yazher - Paid
ITExpert - Unpaid (20 posts) Paid
kuriboh - Unpaid (22 posts) Paid
leonair - Paid
Belarge - Unpaid (24 posts) Paid
Jateng - Unpaid (10 posts) Paid
Bright0515 - Paid
Miles2006 - Paid
Parvati_j - Paid
Judith87403 - Paid
Tungbulu - Paid
Ojinga - Unpaid (30 posts) Paid
Stablexcoin - Submitted incorrect address Paid
Fiasem20 Paid
Winterfost - Unpaid (21 posts) Paid
kingvirtus09 Paid
letteredhub - Unpaid (29 posts) Paid
batang_bitcoin - Paid
Notalony - Unpaid (23 posts) Paid
Road21Bitcoin - Unpaid (nil post)
Rao420 - Paid
JoyMarsha - Paid
ibuddy122505 - Unpaid (19 posts) Paid
lven - Unpaid (10 posts)
fortunecrypto - Unpaid (26 posts) Paid
DarkState - Unpaid (25 posts) Paid
Just Say - Unpaid (20 posts) Paid
Wonder Work - Unpaid (22 posts) Paid

The campaign manager giving an excuse that they ban user that post in gambling board is really hilarious.

Tipstar, as one of their participant create 9 posts in gambling board and 11 posts in non-gambling board, but he's get paid! (Tipstar's post history).

- Excluded boards (WO & Serious, Sig Threads, Press, Politics, Games, Off-topic, Bounty)

I've tagged him and here's the type 1 flag, you can support https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3321

[Tungbulu]

I do not understand what you mean by the Signature campaign not working properly, I'm a participant of the campaign, and I've been paid, the rules were, payments would be made every Monday after activities were confirmed...

Those who weren't paid may have violated one or few rules of the campaign which led to their eviction/disqualification and removal from the campaign, and the campaign manager did well to inform everyone participants that were affected via PM, so as far as I'm concerned, the campaign is working pretty fine.

Besides it the rules were made clear...

Additional Information:
- We reserve the right to select participants for the subscription campaign.
- Each week, no more than 50 participants can take part in the campaign.
- Each participant accepted into the campaign will be notified. To confirm their participation, they need to meet the specified conditions.
- If a participant does not fulfill the conditions, they will be replaced by another participant the following week or excluded from the campaign without payment.

It was pretty obvious that the excluded participants may have defaulted and if the CM's assessment says so, he's definitely reserved with the right to exclude these participants.
Besides, only the CM is reserved with the right to decide on which post is eligible for payment and which is ineligible for payment, so those that weren't paid may have definitely had some ineligible posts which couldn't add up to make up for the  activities/posts (20) required for payment.

_Some participants were removed for breaking some rules (maybe ignorantly or deliberately)
_Some were paid for meeting the CM's post requirements
_Some weren't paid for meeting up with the post requirements.

What's the big deal there?

[Wonder Work]

There are 14 users get paid, 11 users eligible to get paid, 4 users not eligible to get paid, and one user submitted incorrect address.
The campaign manager giving an excuse that they ban user that post in gambling board is really hilarious

I didn't post about gambling. All the posts I have posted are good posts but I don't understand why I am being sent such a message.

[Upgrade00]

It was pretty obvious that the excluded participants may have defaulted and if the CM's assessment says so, he's definitely reserved with the right to exclude these participants.
Besides, only the CM is reserved with the right to decide on which post is eligible for payment and which is ineligible for payment, so those that weren't paid may have definitely had some ineligible posts which couldn't add up to make up for the  activities/posts (20) required for payment.

The terms of the manager's assessment has to be known clearly by the participants. If there are prohibited topics, they need to be clearly stated in the opening thread. Also when you purchase a users signature, you do not buy their posting rights, so they can still post where they want as long as they provide the required 20 or 30 posts for the campaign, what you do as a manager is count the eligible posts and pay based on that.

The manager does reserve the rights to exclude members, but this in fairness has to be done in a transparent manner. Participants shouldn't be on edge, wondering which rule they are unaware of that they may have broken. Clear communication of expectation is very important.

[Strongkored]

There are 14 users get paid, 11 users eligible to get paid, 4 users not eligible to get paid, and one user submitted incorrect address.
The campaign manager giving an excuse that they ban user that post in gambling board is really hilarious

I didn't post about gambling. All the posts I have posted are good posts but I don't understand why I am being sent such a message.

That's the risk when working with someone who is incompetent or at least has no experience as a campaign manager, then you are at risk of not receiving anything because of their inability to implement what should be done.

All campaign participants, including those receiving payments, should removed their signature codes until this problem is resolved because this case could happen to you next week.

[aioc]

There are 14 users get paid, 11 users eligible to get paid, 4 users not eligible to get paid, and one user submitted incorrect address.
The campaign manager giving an excuse that they ban user that post in gambling board is really hilarious

I didn't post about gambling. All the posts I have posted are good posts but I don't understand why I am being sent such a message.

That's the risk when working with someone who is incompetent or at least has no experience as a campaign manager, then you are at risk of not receiving anything because of their inability to implement what should be done.

All campaign participants, including those receiving payments, should removed their signature codes until this problem is resolved.

Those who get paid now may not get paid next week. Imagine participating in a campaign that has no clear and specific rules, and participants are at a loss to explain what they've done wrong; there's no spreadsheet either.

They are trying to build their reputation through their campaign, but they will end up ruining their name; they need a campaign manager if they want their campaign to go smoothly.

[Alone055]

The manager/representative hasn't been responding to any requests or posts in the campaign thread even though he was last active yesterday at around 4:30 PM (forum time), they haven't created and published a spreadsheet so far, even if they paid the participants who were eligible for payment, they didn't make an announcement about it in the thread which a manager should do, and they aren't responding to the complaints and concerns now after they have removed some of the participants and refused to pay them. So overall, there are a lot of things that aren't being done the way they should be.

However, maybe we should give him a day or two more and see what happens. If he comes online, gives a valid explanation about things, and gets things done the way they should be, he should get a chance, but those who aren't paid after working a whole week surely deserve an explanation because there is no rule stating that one cannot make posts related to gambling or they won't get paid.

[hugeblack]

I've tagged him and here's the type 1 flag, you can support https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3321

Since some members were paid, we cannot give him negative trust or support flag, but campaign management was unprofessional^*. Let us wait for his answer, and then we must convince them to appoint a campaign manager and review the payments themselves.


* In addition, I asked some questions in ANN without a response

[fortunecrypto]

I've tagged him and here's the type 1 flag, you can support https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3321

Since some members were paid, we cannot give him negative trust or support flag, but campaign management was unprofessional^*. Let us wait for his answer, and then we must convince them to appoint a campaign manager and review the payments themselves.


* In addition, I asked some questions in ANN without a response

I agree I was tempted to create a scam accusation, but since there are members who got paid, I opted to wait for a good explanation; in my case, he might have forgotten to include the gambling section, but there are members who got paid posting in the gambling section.
His motive is to promote his project here, not to scam people, but the representative has poor communication and insight.
I agree that managers are needed; their experience in handling campaigns will give the platform good results, not like this.
I still wish that they do the right thing, get a manager, and move on to this. Maybe this project has the potential to become one of the longest campaigns here; we never know.

[yahoo62278]

As long as participants are following the rules as posted below

Participant Requirements:
- You must be aware of and comply with the rules for participating in subscription campaigns
- Make a minimum of 20 constructive posts per week
- Removing the signature leads to disqualification
- The link in the signature must remain correct and unchanged
- Excluded boards (WO & Serious, Sig Threads, Press, Politics, Games, Off-topic, Bounty)

they should pay participants. Companies are allowed to add or remove rules, but usually if a rule is being added or taken away they post the rule change and it takes effect on the next pay period. They also need to state what will constitute violating their rules, if it's not posted(within reason) then they cannot ding a participant for breaking a rule.

It was pretty obvious that the excluded participants may have defaulted and if the CM's assessment says so, he's definitely reserved with the right to exclude these participants.
Besides, only the CM is reserved with the right to decide on which post is eligible for payment and which is ineligible for payment, so those that weren't paid may have definitely had some ineligible posts which couldn't add up to make up for the  activities/posts (20) required for payment.

The terms of the manager's assessment has to be know clearly by the participants. If there are prohibited topics, they need to be clearly stated in the opening thread. Also when you purchase a users signature, you do not buy their posting rights, so they can still post where they want as long as they provide the required 20 or 30 posts for the campaign, what you do as a manager is count the eligible posts and pay based on that.

The manager does reserve the rights to exclude members, but this in fairness has to be done in a transparent manner. Participants shouldn't be on edge, wondering which rule they are unaware of that they may have broken. Clear communication of expectation is very important.

This is 100% correct. They just need to exclude posts that are in restricted sections or whatnot, not ban a person for posting in said restricted section.

Overall, they need to hire a manager and spend a few bucks to let someone with experience manage the campaign since they are not well versed on how it's done properly.

[Crypto Library]

<....Cut....>
This is 100% correct. They just need to exclude posts that are in restricted sections or whatnot, not ban a person for posting in said restricted section.

Overall, they need to hire a manager and spend a few bucks to let someone with experience manage the campaign since they are not well versed on how it's done properly.

It's seems that the person who managing their signature campaign is unprofessional at this sector  start with no avatar and a very simple designed signature. Moreover, they are not professional in terms of hiring participants because they have hired all kinds of lower reputable ranked starting from red trust.

For just a few bucks, their signature campaign investment is going to be a complete waste . Anyway there was still time may they can made proper explanation or improve their self or hire a professional campaign maanger for their campaign  .

[TravelMug]

Oh well, the signature participants did take a big risk in this campaigns and there are a lot of red flags in the beginning. This is 2024 already, if we are in the 2017 or even the latter part, we might appreciate this kind of signatures. But if the the manager can't even get a proper design in todays time, with good signature and avatar, so there's something wrong about it.

Then there's no escrow or not campaign spreadsheet and rules are not that clear. And now it's a cluster f**k as others have been paid, while there are some participants who seems to follow the rule but in the last minute or for unknown reasons, are not being paid.

[Wiwo]

This is not the first time some low rank members posts signature campaign and at the end not paying it participants,  I had my suspicion about this project,  and I blame those who participanted in this signature campaign because they should have at least checked out thr service they are about to promote,  and also take guidance from the way the team poor communication and unprofessional attitude.

The manager may never respond and the campaign may become abandoned since there is no update on the week two and whose participants will continue in week two, absord.

[DiMarxist]

I've tagged him and here's the type 1 flag, you can support https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3321

Since some members were paid, we cannot give him negative trust or support flag, but campaign management was unprofessional^*. Let us wait for his answer, and then we must convince them to appoint a campaign manager and review the payments themselves.


* In addition, I asked some questions in ANN without a response

I agree I was tempted to create a scam accusation, but since there are members who got paid, I opted to wait for a good explanation; in my case, he might have forgotten to include the gambling section, but there are members who got paid posting in the gambling section.
His motive is to promote his project here, not to scam people, but the representative has poor communication and insight.
I agree that managers are needed; their experience in handling campaigns will give the platform good results, not like this.
I still wish that they do the right thing, get a manager, and move on to this. Maybe this project has the potential to become one of the longest campaigns here; we never know.

I also received the PM from the manager says he was forced to remove me without pay and immediately pmed him back that he should review my post history because I didn't violate any rule of the campaign and all my posts were on point. And I woke up to see that I was paid. But I don't know if I will be paid next week.

[Dailyscript]

One thing I have learned in this forum is transparency from most managers of signature campaign and that is why there have been progress. If there were no transparency no projects would be hiring campaign managers here. So I do not see any reason why the Cryptomus campaign manager would come out clean and give a response to what is going on in the management. First, there were no spreadsheets, people who asked for a change of address did not respond to them and lastly, the rules were not clear.

[lovesmayfamilis]

What's the big deal there?

What you got paid today doesn't tell you about your future.

I only see a way to avoid making promises. If we don't address the manager's behavior now, several other users will be kicked out next week. This company may regularly replace members who, for one reason or another, are not liked by the manager. It’s a rather cunning plan since it saves money intended for payments.

I'm surprised that there were no payments to people who made more posts. Doesn’t the manager limit people’s participation on the forum by creating a strict posting framework for them of 20 posts, no more, no less? I can assume that within these limits of the allowed number of posts, there will be strict control of content and weeding out inconvenient ones.

Edit: How will the forum look at the fact that there is plagiarism in the manager’s story? You can check the creation dates of the site from which the post was copied. Is it necessary to block a manager for the fact that, at the development stage, the manager did not speak in his own words but copied them from another site? Previously, it sounded like a scam.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1926895.msg64306824#msg64306824

[Y3shot]

The campaign have no spreadsheet for participants to see numbers of post they made for the week, and for the campaign manager to be able to make  comments on participants that are not meeting the standard of the signature campaign.  Spreadsheet would have been better to make things easy  for the CM and participants to see reason for not being paid.

[yahoo62278]

The campaign have no spreadsheet for participants to see numbers of post they made for the week, and for the campaign manager to be able to make  comments on participants that are not meeting the standard of the signature campaign.  Spreadsheet would have been better to make things easy  for the CM and participants to see reason for not being paid.

I'm ok with a manager not sharing the spreadsheet publicly, it does make it easier for participants but not as if a participant cannot go into their own profile and count their posts.

The whole issue is the rules and them not being clear. Waiting for an explanation!!! If someone has not pmed them about this thread, they should do so.