It's full but as the owner said that campaign will be closed so basically it should be removed after the payment is made.

Here's another signature campaign: BetKing.io.

The campaign will be managed by yahoo62278. However, he seems to feel there is no need for there to be escrow for this campaign, apparently.


The Simple Table entry should be something like this:

PNYC

|

BetKing.io

|

post/weekly

|

0.0012

|

0.001

|

0.0008

|

0.0005

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

50/w

|

N

|

And the Detailed Information:

BetKing.io (Thread)
Payment period: Weekly
Payment method: Will be paid to your website account.
Minimum posts: 10 posts per week.
Maximum posts: 50 posts per week.
Payments:  F: 0.0005BTC per post, S: 0.0008BTC per post, H: 0.001BTC per post, L: 0.0012BTC per post.
Escrow: No.
Miscellaneous: Posts must have 75 characters minimum. Posts in signature campaign threads, sports tipster threads, Games and rounds, Off topic, Beginners and help, Meta(unless constructive), Investor based games, Micro earnings, and Local boards don't count.

ore-mine was paying for ~2 years,

I believe that just as how scam campaigns arent listed here, campaigns without escrow also shouldnt be listed

This is exactly why yahoo shouldn't be blamed for the ormine fiasco. He now has a history of only running signature campaigns of longstanding companies that have positive reputation.

Escrow is also not a guarantee. It is possible that the escrow ends up running away with the BTC when they are holding funds in behalf of a signature campaign.

The "non-listed" campaigns in this thread are those which come from a HYIP or ponzi site not because they are using escrow or not.
If you dont believe in non-escrow campaign so dont join it.

added -> http://pastebin.com/UtNembBv

You're overestimating the role of escrow. It's a good practice and brings comfort to participants especially when signing up for new campaigns operated by new/untrusted members.

But it's not a guarantee of anything. The amounts escrowed are rarely enough to cover max possible expenditure (especially where there are delays in payments) and using escrow doesn't mean the business can't be a scam. There's also always a risk that escrow provider will run away with the funds (not sure whether it has happened before).

In judging campaign's credibility, it's best to look at the bigger picture and previous history. In case of betking (formerly PRC), they've already run 2 sig campaigns, have done number of high-value promos, they hold the biggest investment fund of all BTC gambling sites (around 3k). So the risk of them defaulting on signature payments is close to zero.

Removed bitin.io, Added warning asteri[sk|x] for 777coin

-> http://pastebin.com/FtRyK194

But that's easy to bypass. Campaign manager could announce that there are only 10 open spots, escrow sufficient amount, but after a week they could extend to 20-30 spots. Same goes with increase in rates, delayed payments, payments to site accounts etc. And if you act as an escrow, there's not much you can do. You can't really demand more money (unless you have the detailed escrow agreement).