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.

[LTU_btc]

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 

Such flexibility is really needed. After all, we are all human and life happens sometimes - you may have such terrible week when you won't have any time for Bitcointalk and it's far from being on your priority list. After all, sometimes we all need to take short break from internet activities and clean our heads a bit. I really appreciate such flexibility from managers.

[Zoomic]

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 

Such flexibility is really needed. After all, we are all human and life happens sometimes - you may have such terrible week when you won't have any time for Bitcointalk and it's far from being on your priority list. After all, sometimes we all need to take short break from internet activities and clean our heads a bit. I really appreciate such flexibility from managers.

It is fine that you guys have seen the reason for the thread unlike someone above who saw it as an eye service.
We really need such flexibility in the forum. Life happens and it doesn't make sense to me that someone would be denied pay for not making 1 post while they already made 19 posts wearing the company's signature.

[avp2306]

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.

This is what nice about how @Little Mouse handle his campaign, but you cannot made other managers to follow what he do. Since sometimes its understandable on why they do such thing, I think they just want their participants to hit those post requirement to maximize the exposure of the companies they are promoting.

So they have their own style as what other said so people need to follow all the requirements in order for them to get paid. I understand the frustration for people not getting paid after they missed 1 post, but that's part of the campaign rules that they need to follow.

[coupable]

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.

You can address the topic with more professional analysis without including a lot of good emotions for your campaign manager. Nothing wrong with what julerz said and you can consider him kidding you. No offense.

It has been discussed many times and confirmed that the pay per post model can help reduce the spam coming from signature campaign participants significantly. See the campaigns of AbDRoyse777, they are all pay per post structure.

[xLays]

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.

This is the kind of consideration campaign manager should have. I don’t think LM is the only one who does this. If I remember correctly, this also happened to me in another signature campaign I joined before. It already happened to me twice in LM’s campaign here in the Shuffle signature campaign, and I admitted that I didn’t reach 25 posts per week. Shuffle.com requires a minimum of 25 posts per week to get paid. Since I only had 24 counted posts, he just deducted a few dollars from my weekly payment, which is reasonable. Some of us will feel bad if we don’t receive payment after putting in effort to post eventhough we didn't meet the quota especially missing only one post.

[EarnOnVictor]

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.

This is the generosity of LM, rather than you believing you are being paid per post.

You might just noticed it, but I've noticed it on the spreadsheet for so long. Let me believe that he has the right to deny the payment altogether if you didn't meet the 25 minimum required posts, as it's clearly stated in the Ts&Cs of the campaign. But his human feelings might have helped you because you've done 92%(23/25) of the work already.

However, don't get used to it, it mustn't persist. And I guess he frowns more on the gambling section requirement. A guy was penalised for not fulfilling that requirement. Be guided!