Quote from: Lucius on March 03, 2020, 02:51:19 PM

I think there is no reason to worry too much, as far as I can see the campaign is looking for a total of 16 members which is a totally insignificant number when compared to what had the largest spam campaign with over 600 members producing thousands of spam posts per day.

16 members * 5 threads = 80 threads per week
80 threads per week = 320 threads per month
That is equal to 23 threads every 2 days..

Keep in mind that each member will most likely write at least 6 posts per week to make sure at least 5 will count. That changes the final answer to.. 27 threads every 2 days.

Speaking from purely personal experience: When you have to hit a high max target in order to maximize your weekly payment (e.g. BitVest paying a maximum of 60 posts/week), you get to a point where you struggle to hit that target and therefore you start bullshitting. This is something I really do not want to do, but subconsciously I did it every now and then. And I'm sure the best of us do it.

23 threads/2 days as a requirement is gonna hit BitcoinTalk hard. I think I've made 4 threads in the past month and I barely ever feel the need to do it unless I have an opinion I really want to share or some news I'd like to tell others about. Trust me, there's gonna be a point where these participants will not know what to write threads about anymore as they'll run out of news articles.. so you can warmly welcome bullshit, shit-threads and spam.

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on March 03, 2020, 03:15:59 PM

Sure, but it sets the precedent that this kind of behavior is both desirable to the advertiser and permitted by the forum. I suspect we might see other, larger, campaigns start to ask for similar posting requirements.

For a good poster, it might not be a problem, but we know that ~90% of bounty spammers aren't good posters. Most will open threads which have been discussed 100 times before, or are simply legalized plagiarism in the form of stolen content with a link at the bottom.

We also know that bounty spammers don't just see their posts being trashed and accept it. Any thread of theirs which is trashed will simply prompt them to create more so they can still hit their quota.

I second your thoughts.

Quote from: crypto1010 on March 03, 2020, 04:24:05 PM

They will not get paid then. They are doing that anyways, our campaign is not going to change that. The admin of the forum could have blocked signatures a long time ago if he really wanted.

Big difference between paying for posts and paying for threads. I can write +50 posts a week but I assure you that I'm gonna run out of ideas for new threads very often. I expect a lot of "is craig wright satoshi or not?? what do you think " kind of threads..

How are you going to decide whether a thread is going to be counted toward the weekly requirement or not? "Not paying them" sounds kinda fishy to me. One member may have a legitimate question, ask it and then you decide it doesn't count because the question's been asked before?