⭐ Merited by DireWolfM14 (10)
- Merit earned
- Quality of posts
- Sections they frequent
- Posts they do on average weekly
- Length of posts on average
- Trust
Allow me to nitpick:
Merit and post quality are more or less the same. Or at least that's how it's supposed to be.
Some campaigns already pay based on the board, which usually is the gambling board. That hasn't lead to better post quality.
Length of posts is a tricky one: a long post can be very good, but when 28 characters are enough, making it longer makes the post worse.
For Trust, I've seen some campaigns that offered spots for highly trusted members, but usually it's ignored (unless it's red). For branding I can imagine higher trusted users give a better impression.
For the first 4 points on your list, I feel like any good campaign manager must have been looking at those for years. Users who made 5 posts in a year and start applying for campaigns don't get hired, users with shitposts shouldn't get hired, and users who post on boards that aren't relevant for the campaign shouldn't be hired. And I've already seen customized payments for several campaigns depending on the user too.
All this means a lot more work for the campaign manager, which is why the spam campaigns don't care at all.
I am in signature campaigns because I am here anyway and might as well make some money while I post.
That's the spirit 
Quote
But every Monday I get paid the same per post even though for the last few months I have been posting less and they have been shorter.
I don't get paid per post, and I don't want to adjust my posting habits because someone pays me for it, but still, it always feels like I owe it to the campaign to not just go silent for days.Quote
If you did it 100% anonymously it might be better. Nobody knows who is making what.
Combine this with silent payments, and it becomes very hard to distinguish who earned what thanks to the amounts being private as well as the addresses.When you talk about payrates, you have to look at the budget you have for each week. You have to balance hiring as many posters as you can to increase visibility along with trying to have some of the better posters in a campaign with decent rates. If you only concentrate on the better posters, you will not get very many people in the campaign so you lose visibility for the company. Big balancing act.
Do you have any hard data on click-through rates and ROI for the advertisers? From what I've seen, most campaigns have a generic signature and don't even track individual performance. SirJohnVonSlotty's Sent feedback shows a rare insight into the results of tracking individual signatures per user. If you want to really pay the best users in your campaign, I'd say you'd need to have data on each user by giving them personal signature links.25-50 merit: extra 1 USD/post
51-100 merit: extra 2 USD/post
~
25-50 merit: extra 10 USD
51-100 merit: extra 20 USD
That monetizes Merit in case a Merit source does this:51-100 merit: extra 2 USD/post
~
25-50 merit: extra 10 USD
51-100 merit: extra 20 USD
It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire.
A quality post does not necessarily mean a big wall of shit. Sometimes you can make a quality post in just a few words. I am by no means saying that every post a user makes needs to be 1000 characters, all in the gambling section, and only talking about the company that employs you. That's just crazy.
I've always liked hilariousandco's take on this:A quality/constructive poster will generally have no pattern to their posting history and will have posts ranging from one word to one sentence to several paragraphs and everything in between and this is what you should be aiming for.
Just take a look at the history of some of the shitposters in the Stake campaign, and you'll see pages of posts with the same length. All long enough to reach the quota, but nothing more than that.