Bitstarz.com March Signature Campaign – up to 0.1 BTC and more per month

[bitgeek]

Weren't there supposed to be bonuses this month? According to the payments list nobody got any.

[1714867146]

1714867146

[1714867146]

1714867146

[1714867146]

1714867146

[1714867146]

1714867146

[Mr Crabs]

Weren't there supposed to be bonuses this month? According to the payments list nobody got any.

According to the op there were 3 bonuses available. Maybe they forgot them or something.

[monbux]

Weren't there supposed to be bonuses this month? According to the payments list nobody got any.

Thanks for the payments mate!

Can you also please credit the following guys:

1ST - 0.12 BTC - bitgeek
2ND - 0.08 BTC - IIpeBeD_MeDBeD
3RD - 0.05 BTC - SectorZero

One more thing, could you check what's the balance we have with you?

Thanks!

Got this PM from bitstarz a while ago!  Sending these prizes now!  Congratz to all the winners!
TXid: https://blockchain.info/tx/782944640c6f576a7016d00aed7a882e234098f4d1c1ea03dca30d1e4d71a747

[botany]

Just curious.

I saw that Neotox received a payment of 0.1 BTC. Is this for managing the signature campaign or taking part in it?
From February's payment, I presume that the fee for managing the campaign isn't 0.1 BTC.

He definitely didn't complete 50 posts in the month of March.
Isn't it a conflict of interest to have the campaign manager participating in the campaign?

[hilariousandco]

Just curious.

I saw that Neotox received a payment of 0.1 BTC. Is this for managing the signature campaign or taking part in it?

Maybe it's both?

From February's payment, I presume that the fee for managing the campaign isn't 0.1 BTC.

Why would you assume it isn't? 0.1 seems to be pretty common for running a sig campaign.

Isn't it a conflict of interest to have the campaign manager participating in the campaign?

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

[botany]

Just curious.

I saw that Neotox received a payment of 0.1 BTC. Is this for managing the signature campaign or taking part in it?

Maybe it's both?

It can't be both, since the payment for the signature campaign is 0.1 BTC. There may have been some part payment as a special case, but then this hasn't been mentioned.

From February's payment, I presume that the fee for managing the campaign isn't 0.1 BTC.

Why would you assume it isn't? 0.1 seems to be pretty common for running a sig campaign.

February's payment.
https://blockchain.info/tx/122ae3d79957b15edebb13b059c89131fe4a511ad6dd4293bd4e76816264b49a
Payment to Neotox = 0.11 BTC and he had completed 50 posts in this month.

Isn't it a conflict of interest to have the campaign manager participating in the campaign?

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

Stingleword doesn't participate any more. He just carries the signature.
Since you are evaluating your own posts and paying yourself, there is a possibility of abuse. That is where I feel there is a conflict of interest.

[ndnh]

Just curious.

I saw that Neotox received a payment of 0.1 BTC. Is this for managing the signature campaign or taking part in it?

Maybe it's both?

It can't be both, since the payment for the signature campaign is 0.1 BTC. There may have been some part payment as a special case, but then this hasn't been mentioned.

From February's payment, I presume that the fee for managing the campaign isn't 0.1 BTC.

Why would you assume it isn't? 0.1 seems to be pretty common for running a sig campaign.

February's payment.
https://blockchain.info/tx/122ae3d79957b15edebb13b059c89131fe4a511ad6dd4293bd4e76816264b49a
Payment to Neotox = 0.11 BTC and he had completed 50 posts in this month.

Isn't it a conflict of interest to have the campaign manager participating in the campaign?

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

Stingleword doesn't participate any more. He just carries the signature.
Since you are evaluating your own posts and paying yourself, there is a possibility of abuse. That is where I feel there is a conflict of interest.

The payment of 0.1BTC is more likely to be for carrying the signature only.

It isn't really a conflict of interest.

You are discussing the terms between Neotox and Bitstarz lol. Let them be. I am sure Bitstarz knows. We don't have to bother about the agreement between them as long as the participants get paid.

Just my opinion.

Thanks

[izanagi narukami]

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

Yeah I think its a fee for manage the campaign.
If the company has entrust the manager X to handle the campaign, manager can do anything including enroll the campaign and got paid even he did not reach min post.

For me, it's called as a Power of Campaign Manager
But it also depend on profesionalism as the campaign manager

Stingleword doesn't participate any more. He just carries the signature.
Since you are evaluating your own posts and paying yourself, there is a possibility of abuse. That is where I feel there is a conflict of interest.

This period he joined the campaign

Okay, it's been over a month. There's plenty of Senior-level availability now, so I'm getting back on the train.

Recent Bet: http://luckyb.it/check?txin=4c56f9ed52ec68f474040e41648c531acb60aa7ab89bbe7514b1908392e1aba9:9 (x24, aww yeah!)
Address: 1WayStGErPLgjrGpK7Ro36ZA2eeraoaMi
Posts: 1128
Activity: 392 (Senior)

[Quickseller]

Just curious.

I saw that Neotox received a payment of 0.1 BTC. Is this for managing the signature campaign or taking part in it?

Maybe it's both?

It can't be both, since the payment for the signature campaign is 0.1 BTC. There may have been some part payment as a special case, but then this hasn't been mentioned.

I don't think it matters, nor is it any of your business. It may or may not be a conflict of interest, however the owners obviously know about it before the fact.

From February's payment, I presume that the fee for managing the campaign isn't 0.1 BTC.

Why would you assume it isn't? 0.1 seems to be pretty common for running a sig campaign.

February's payment.
https://blockchain.info/tx/122ae3d79957b15edebb13b059c89131fe4a511ad6dd4293bd4e76816264b49a
Payment to Neotox = 0.11 BTC and he had completed 50 posts in this month.

Cool. Maybe they decided to pay him a bonus last month, maybe a lot of other things. .1 is not unreasonable to manage a campaign.

Isn't it a conflict of interest to have the campaign manager participating in the campaign?

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

Stingleword doesn't participate any more. He just carries the signature.
Since you are evaluating your own posts and paying yourself, there is a possibility of abuse. That is where I feel there is a conflict of interest.

You're right he doesn't participate

Okay, it's been over a month. There's plenty of Senior-level availability now, so I'm getting back on the train.

Recent Bet: http://luckyb.it/check?txin=4c56f9ed52ec68f474040e41648c531acb60aa7ab89bbe7514b1908392e1aba9:9 (x24, aww yeah!)
Address: 1WayStGErPLgjrGpK7Ro36ZA2eeraoaMi
Posts: 1128
Activity: 392 (Senior)

Actually he does.

As I mentioned above if the owners have a problem with this then they could easily put a stop to it. I would doubt that the owners are completely ignoring what is happening with their sig campaign, they are just not involved in the day to day operation of it. I can assure you that if any bonuses were given out that were not authorized then he would quickly be removed from being manager, regardless of if it was to himself or not.

Your arguments are also moot because he could just as easily participated via his alt account, and no it would not be detected because it is very easy to hide the fact that one of your accounts is your alt.

[ndnh]

For me, it's called as a Power of Campaign Manager
But it also depend on profesionalism as the campaign manager

I would say it depends on the terms between the campaign manager and the management of the advertised site.

For example, I don't pay myself for carrying the signature, because my pay covers it too. So, does the co-manager. On the other hand, certain other campaign managers pay themselves, but as you pointed out, that is allowed unless they agreed to the contrary.

Thanks

[hilariousandco]

Why would it be? Many operate campaigns and also participate (stinglewood, Marco etc). There shouldn't be a problem unless he is paying himself after not having made enough posts or dishing out bonuses to himself.

Yeah I think its a fee for manage the campaign.
If the company has entrust the manager X to handle the campaign, manager can do anything including enroll the campaign and got paid even he did not reach min post.

For me, it's called as a Power of Campaign Manager
But it also depend on profesionalism as the campaign manager

This doesn't sound good coming from someone who runs a campaign. This is basically saying it's ok to 'dip into the till' and steal as long as you have the power of being campaign manager which sounds like abuse of power/trust to me. Managers have been entrusted to run the campaign properly on behalf of the company and they have to play by the rules unless they've been given special privilege by the owner. If he's signing up to the campaign and paying himself without having done the posts then that's dishonest (unless bitstarz has said it's ok). Imagine if he has alts that he just pays out without doing the posts too.

[botany]

I don't think it matters, nor is it any of your business. It may or may not be a conflict of interest, however the owners obviously know about it before the fact.

Come on.... This none of your business line of argument is getting old.
I have just raised a question and people (including you) have expressed their thoughts. Period.

[Neotox]

I just send them complete detailed stats of the enrolled users and then they pick the users who qualified for payments and send the list of payments to escrow.
I want to make it clear that i never added myself in list of users to be paid also i m not processing payments, i m managing this campaign and participating also, all the payments are manually approved by bitstars.net

[botany]

I just send them complete detailed stats of the enrolled users and then they pick the users who qualified for payments and send the list of payments to escrow.
I want to make it clear that i never added myself in list of users to be paid also i m not processing payments, i m managing this campaign and participating also, all the payments are manually approved by bitstars.net

Fair enough.
I have got my response.