Weekly campaign posts.

[LogitechMouse]

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.

He didn't say this, but he's been doing this for quite some time already. As somebody that's always looking for the spreadsheets of those campaigns that he's been managing, I've seen some campaigns like Betpanda (where I am right now), and Metawin I think as well where if you missed one or two posts, your effort will not be wasted still, and you will get paid based on the total amount posts you made for the week. I also had an experience with that where I made only 24 for the week instead of the 25 recommended posts, and still paid me $96 instead of $100. I haven't thank him for that, but I believe that he will just ignore me because that's the kind of person he is.

Kidding aside, I know that he's been this kind of manager to us who are in his campaign, and at some point we need to appreciate it, but let's not force other managers to do the same. At the end of the day, Little Mouse didn't specifically announced that Betpanda or any other campaigns will be a pay-per-post already. On the flip side, I've also saw participants on Betpanda where I think they only made around 10+ posts and didn't get paid at all.

[Free Market Capitalist]

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.

He didn't say this, but he's been doing this for quite some time already. As somebody that's always looking for the spreadsheets of those campaigns that he's been managing, I've seen some campaigns like Betpanda (where I am right now), and Metawin I think as well where if you missed one or two posts, your effort will not be wasted still, and you will get paid based on the total amount posts you made for the week.

That happened to me too, but with fewer posts. I think that since I've been in the MW campaign, every week I've met at least the minimum, and most weeks the maximum, but there was one week when I was really busy, although I continued to write some posts without expecting any payment, because in the end the forum is like a hobby, and I think I wrote a total of 15 or so. Imagine my surprise when I saw that I was paid for that week.

I think it's appreciated and reasonable. It's one thing if you're below the minimum for several weeks, in which case you won't get paid or you'll be kicked out of the campaign, but if once in a while you can't reach the minimum, I think it's appreciated that he's kind enough to pay you.

[libert19]

Yes, I am also fan of pay-per-post structure.

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 

I have also experienced something similar with my current campaign. I had missed gambling post quota this time, and BM (which is JacksClub itself) payed nonetheless.

[UmerIdrees]

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.

Every campaign has different rules, and yes, most of the campaigns aren't pay per post, we need to complete the post count in order to get paid. I remember in my previous campaigns, even if I missed my weekly quota by a single post, I was denied payment for the entire week. 

I think even with the fixed posts requirements, the campaign manager should be flexible enough to count the posts if they are near  the quota like in your case you missed by just two posts. Yeah,, if someone has done only 10 or 15 posts, then in that case the payment can be denied for the week.

[God Of Thunder]

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.

That's nice.
All pay-per-post signature campaigns work like this. But sometimes other campaigns require you to have 25 eligible posts to qualify for the payment. I also run these types of campaigns. Regarding the note, I actually send the payment if the person writes at least 55% of the posts, which means I check if they have written at least 13 eligible posts. However, if they do not meet two requirements simultaneously, such as not meeting both the minimum gambling and total eligible posts requirements, I may send the payment in half. But if someone writes too few posts, I may not send them any payment.

[FinneysTrueVision]

I’ve been in campaigns that had a high requirement of gambling posts and it felt like a chore trying to complete the final few posts needed to fulfill the weekly quota. Since then, I try to join campaigns that are less demanding.

Last week, an exchange that was considered a mixer by forum rules was a hot topic and I made some posts in their thread that got deleted. Sometimes threads get deleted and you don’t realize until it’s too late. Thankfully, I didn’t have to stress about falling short of the required amount because the Bitsler campaign only requires a minimum of 10 posts.

[robelneo]

Last week, an exchange that was considered a mixer by forum rules was a hot topic and I made some posts in their thread that got deleted. Sometimes threads get deleted and you don’t realize until it’s too late. Thankfully, I didn’t have to stress about falling short of the required amount because the Bitsler campaign only requires a minimum of 10 posts.

Brother, you're a natural poster, and sometimes natural posters contribute to topics they think add substance, without considering the consequences of the thread getting deleted. This also happens to me; it's good that the manager I worked with based our payout on a per-post basis.
There are campaigns you need to hit the minimum on, or they'll pay you half if you don't. It's good that LM and Royse777 understand the situation with the posters, and they've made it a pay-per-post arrangement.

[AakZaki]

Each Manager always applies their own rules and it doesn't need to be compared. Haven't we already known the rules since we registered, if we lack posts and then are not paid, it means that it is the consequence, because we do lack posts.

As for the Manager who continues to pay even though there is a post delay, it means that it is a form of policy and tolerance from the Manager, not an obligation that must always exist. So things like this should be handled wisely, without feeling disadvantaged or comparing one Manager to another, because each campaign has different rules of the game from the beginning.