Weekly campaign posts.

[Zoomic]

Last night I experienced something I was glad about in the Betpanda campaign managed by Little Mouse. I believe that should be the standard.
I was unable to complete 25 posts per week (which is my weekly post quota). I did 23 posts and I could do 25 but I was in a low mood, I decided not to force it. So, I thought I missed payment but I was surprised to know I was paid for 23 posts. I think this is the right way to go. Paying per post will make participants not to spam in order to complete their weekly post quota.

I seize this opportunity to appreciate Little Mouse and any other managers who follow the pay per post rule. This is commendable and not a situation that someone could be denied payment when they do not complete 1 out of 20 posts.

[Charles-Tim]

Pay per posts is very good, but each campaigns with different rules and requirements. Little Mouse is a very good manager, but other managers with different rules and requirements to complete 15, 20 or 24 posts before receiving payment is neither bad. If you are not paid for a week, it is not that bad. Some people can even message the campaign manager that he will not be posting in a week and which the manager will understand and appreciate.

[julerz12]

Okay, we get it, you love him. 
This sounds like something you should send to LM (privately) rather than make an entire thread about it. I feel like I'm reading an engagement proposal. ❤️ 
Also, we already have plenty of sig-campaigns with per-post rates, in case you missed them, see here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.msg66144047#msg66144047

[Zoomic]

Okay, we get it, you love him. 
This sounds like something you should send to LM (privately) rather than make an entire thread about it. I feel like I'm reading an engagement proposal. ❤️ 

It was not supposed to be a Pm because it wasn't applied to only me. So, it's rule. I made the post public to encourage other managers to adopt the nice rule.

Also, we already have plenty of sig-campaigns with per-post rates, in case you missed them, see here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.msg66144047#msg66144047

Thanks for the heads-up. I have had the history of being in a long term campaign. So, I am not that familiar that such method of payment exists except for BestChange some years ago.

...but other managers with different rules and requirements to complete 15, 20 or 24 posts before receiving payment is neither bad. If you are not paid for a week, it is not that bad. Some people can even message the campaign manager that he will not be posting in a week and which the manager will understand and appreciate.

This is not about a manager being good or bad. It is about the rule. The pay per post rule is better than whatever you described above.

[Charles-Tim]

This is not about a manager being good or bad. It is about the rule. The pay per post rule is better than whatever you described above.

I understood what you were saying, I neither meant that any campaign manager is good or bad, but I am just saying different campaigns with different rules and requirements that we just have to obey, for us to get paid weekly.

I understand that you are happy because you made 23 posts but you were paid the 23 posts that you made. It is something good but I just indirectly meant that this discussion is not necessary but I wanted to be polite about it.

I can not be happy if I am not paid weekly because of incomplete weekly posts, but the rules and requirements must be followed.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Each manager certainly has their own style or standard, and one thing about LM is that he is a bit flexible. He understands that despite the set minimum post requirement, one of the weeks a member might have something going on with their life and may not meet the set requirement. I have also experienced a similar thing in the past, and he did me a solid 

[Wiwo]

Little Mouse have flexible campaign payment system, even though he stated on the campaign page that minimum of 25 posts per week.

If a member fails to meet that weekly benchmark posts, manager LM pays you based on the number of posts you made that week.

I noticed this in my early weeks in the campaign, and he have being doing that all along infact if you check that spreadsheet you see amount payable per posts.

[bitmover]

Last night I experienced something I was glad about in the Betpanda campaign managed by Little Mouse. I believe that should be the standard.
I was unable to complete 25 posts per week (which is my weekly post quota). I did 23 posts and I could do 25 but I was in a low mood, I decided not to force it. So, I thought I missed payment but I was surprised to know I was paid for 23 posts. I think this is the right way to go. Paying per post will make participants not to spam in order to complete their weekly post quota.

I seize this opportunity to appreciate Little Mouse and any other managers who follow the pay per post rule. This is commendable and not a situation that someone could be denied payment when they do not complete 1 out of 20 posts.

I think this is pretty common actually,  being paid per posts per week.

Although there are some campaigns with a minimum quota of 5 posts to gambling boards. And if you don't meet those minimum posts, you might not get paid for that week. So keep an eye open.