Change of terms of company since participants executed all actions DECEPTION is named. Thought of some independent public accountants tell that a page falls short of the real. Not whatever public accountants can check a page for private messages or you think that here foolish people. I on a page have all information: my name that I can prove, all the personal information in open access, there are reports and comments. If under your posts nobody puts Likes and comments, then it is not My guilt, as a proprietor of page. It is indicated in terms, to do reposts, about Likes and comments not words. But you all exactly counted up her as FAKE. Now I understood why for a manager negative rating. We draw conclusion. All the successes!

We asked external auditors to join us at the very end of the campaign to revise all the participants, so it's not about methodology they use (it's also was done automatically, not manually).

Dear participants of bounty campaign,

First of all, no rule has been changed. Point 3 in General rules (available at the website https://papyrus.global/bounty) says:

- One user can participate only with one account. In case that we note any double-registrations, duplicate accounts (except the initial one) will be permanently banned from the campaign. Any falsifications, attempts to wrap results and or the number of friends followers, double registrations, duplicate accounts (excluding the primary account), are forbidden and users will be permanently excluded from the campaign.

Second, the share of tokens to be distributed to bounty participants has not changed - it's still 2% of PRP designated for TGE Round 1.
The thing is how they will be distributed. We aim to reward all participants who really contributed to our campaign - bring brand awareness and new followers and supports.

In case someone shares posts with 3000+ audience of bots or "mutual subscriptions" profiles, the information would circulate in these groups so no really effort would be done to promote our project. Instead, there are participants, who shares with real audiences, write posts and make their best to spread around the world the idea of Papyrus.

We don't mind to share 2% of PRP among all the participants in the lists. But would it be fair in the case of the above mentioned examples? We believe it wouldn't be. If you have another opinion - just text us in Telegram or via info@papyrus.global.

"The external auditors should check how the bounty manager performed his job, and if something is wrong, then he(she) must pay to all hired staff out of his(her) share."

Could you clarify a bit this idea?

I think this situation will negatively affect the name of the company and will adversely affect its development !!!

Admin,
could you contribute me to the blog campaign table.
I wrote an article about Papyrus on the portal (blog) about cryptocurrencies: http://cryptoinfo.top/cryptonews/papyrus-ecosistema-internet-reklamy.html

For some reason, I did not get into a spreadsheet and in the end did not get steaks.
Please correct this.

My details:
Bitcointalk profile: Cryptozond https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1190894
My Ethereum wallet:
0xE09319CEB0C8cf2029e27F85E1Bcb1159c63aF8e

Sharing posts with friend lists consisted of bots IS NOT A PROMOTION. It's a falsification and theft of stakes reserved for fair contributors.

Hi! For some reason I couldn't find you in the table, though I see that article is nice.
Have you registered properly in Blog&Media campaign? Could you please text to our manager in Telegram so that we could resolve your issue? Please, do this asap.

You couldn't find any quote from us that will resemble your last statement.
We pursue a constructive approach to working with a community. As mentioned - if you have personal sense of unfairness (that something went wrong with evaluation of your bounty effort) - we really glad to consider your arguments via Telegram or info@papyrus.global.

Could you kindly elaborate on it, please?