Characters long rule, in signature campaign.

[Perfectbaby]

Constructive post implies that they shouldn't be that spamming and of course when you look at some post you would definitely find out that those people are degenerate those post to meet their quota for the week. Naturally when making post or comments you should try to engage yourself with what they are discussing. This makes you comment without even thinking of meeting up post quota, and there are some people who do post everything in just 2 days. This is not acceptable by managers at least participants should be spreading their post within the week instead of just 2-3 days, this is called shit post and spamming just to meet up with the requirements to get paid. Post difference and space should be at least 10-30 minutes above, before making additional posts.

[Findingnemo]

This isn't a forum-related matter, should be moved to service discussion and reported from my end.

Forum allows even a single word to be replied as long as it is not a troll or zero value post, and the character lengths are implemented because of the campaign requirements, not sure exactly why but I guess the paid posts should be a decent length to make other to click the below signatures?

[Itz-prisigold]

In my own opinion Campaign managers asking users to comment a certain number of characters is both good and bad and probably to avoid spamming. And I think why campaign managers add at least 150 to 200 characters is simply  to avoid one line spam posts like: “I agree” or “great project” e.t.c . I believe that the forum should have quality discussion and not all this empty post to get paid.

And truth be told, I honestly think that this rule can indirectly encourage people to start making off topic posts. Because it's very possible that when a person has already made he's/her point in 80 or 100 characters, they may start adding unnecessary sentences or points just to reach the requirement. But if someone really does have more points to add to the discussion, then yes, the extra characters are a big advantage.

But for me, I think the quality should not be measured mainly by character count, it's just the mindset of the poster and if the person genuinely wants to contribute to a topic then even 100 characters can spark a strong discussion. But if the user is just posting to complete he's/she post count because of the pay, then even 500 characters won't save quality, So length alone does not really guarantee quality.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Can this rule also be the reason why some people usually go off topic, so they can meet up to the required number of characters needed by campaign managers.

One of the first things I noticed when I joined here is that people generally tend to write longer posts than in other forums I've been active on. So, instead of making a clear point in a few sentences, they repeat the same idea in different words, and stretch simple thoughts into full paragraphs without adding real value, thinking that it will look better when managers check their posts, and wanting to make sure that they get paid for them.

Longer posts are sometimes needed ofc, but more often than not its just a fluff.

Right. There are several tools where fans of being verbose could check how much of their texts contain useful "thoughts" and how much "water". Very often, "water" literally "floods" one small thought.

[EarnOnVictor]

In my own opinion Campaign managers asking users to comment a certain number of characters is both good and bad and probably to avoid spamming. And I think why campaign managers add at least 150 to 200 characters is simply  to avoid one line spam posts like: “I agree” or “great project” e.t.c . I believe that the forum should have quality discussion and not all this empty post to get paid.

I wonder how the forum would be if such a mindless approach is allowed. The CMs are even doing the forum a favour by making that clause mandatory, and I wonder how a barely one forum line post + a few extra characters should be an issue.

Besides, those companies paying for campaigns here are not doing it to waste their time, but for marketing. The lesser the inputs, the lesser the possibility of the SEO. Even though they do not want to burden anyone, yet semantic load is still important for what they paid for to be  actualised.

Above all, it's a choice to accept the campaign, and if you do, you must be capable. The 150-200 characters should be a walkover for any serious person.

[Darker45]

That's how short the requirement is. It's not long. You're only asked that your posts must at least be 150-200 characters short. If you stick to it, you'd only make 1.5 lines per post. That's not long enough to go off topic, or else it would surely be deleted by the moderators.

[jcojci]

As long as the post is stick on the topic, managers will accept and they needs to understand the topic and shares their thoughts. And writing 150-200 characters will no need that long.

Managers will know what he needs to do so let that be in their hands.

[TypoTonic]

I see some campaign managers including in their signature campaign rules that, your posts must be least 200 or 150 characters long.
Can this rule also be the reason why some people usually go off topic, so they can meet up to the required number of characters needed by campaign managers.
Those this really lead to shit posting in the forum.

You literally only need 2-3 sentences to reach 200 characters, and that's usually enough to get your point across.

Note this campaign managers usually add constructive at the end of the statement.
For example “Your post must be at least 200 characters long and constructive.”

Some members go overboard because they think that longer posts appear as "constructive", but that's not necessarily true. Let me share this quote from the Signature Campaign Guidelines:

Short replies are not always bad and long ones are not always good. Sometimes all that is required is a simple one word yes or no response, but stretching out an answer just to appear constructive usually has the opposite effect.

[bitmover]

I see some campaign managers including in their signature campaign rules that, your posts must be least 200 or 150 characters long.
Can this rule also be the reason why some people usually go off topic, so they can meet up to the required number of characters needed by campaign managers.

150 characters is just a couple of lines. Your OP post had nearly 500 characters.

If you cant write 150 characters without going off topic, it is because you have nothing to say and you shouldn't post. With very few exceptions.