Contests by voting protection: how to promote an entry under each check

What is voting protection, and why does it change how you promote?

Voting protection is every check a contest puts between a supporter and a counted vote. Organizers add them so that each person counts once, and each one is a step your supporters must finish.

That is the whole reason this section exists. A contest with a plain vote button needs a plain ask. A contest that sends a confirmation email, wants a sign-up, shows a challenge or limits votes per network needs an ask that names those steps, because every step is a place where a willing supporter can give up.

CoinMarketing Pro starts every contest project by voting once ourselves, on a phone, the way a stranger would, and writing down each screen. Those notes become the wording of the ask, the order of the reminders and the plan for pacing. They also tell us what to measure. Our rules and risk consulting and the free rules and risk check use the same walk-through.

The guides linked below cover each protection type in turn. They share one rule: we explain the steps to supporters and help them finish, and we never help anyone get around a check.

Which of the ten protection types is your contest using?

Most contests use one or two of these, and some stack three. Match what you saw on your own test vote to the rows, then open the guide for the check that comes first in a supporter's path, because that is where most people leave.

How do identity checks differ from rate limits and human checks?

They ask different questions, so they need different messages.

• Identity checks ask who the voter is: email, registration, social login, phone codes. The message must explain the steps and the privacy side, then return the supporter to the entry.
• Rate limits ask how often and from where: daily limits and IP or device limits. The message must be repeatable and spread across days and places.
• Human checks ask whether a person is voting: the captcha. The message should promise one quick check and give help when it fails.
• Channel and judgement setups change where or by whom the vote is cast: app voting, jury hybrids and voting widgets. The message leads with the install step, the jury criteria or the quirks of the widget.

Stacked protections

When a contest stacks checks, the order matters more than the count. A supporter who must create an account, confirm an email and pass a challenge is asked three times to continue. We write one message that lists the three in order, with a plain sentence for each, instead of leaving three separate surprises. That single change often decides whether a warm supporter finishes.

How do you write the ask when steps stand between the click and the vote?

Name the steps in the order the supporter meets them, say how much effort they take in plain words, and say what to do when one fails. The craft is in the wording, but the formula is short.

What every ask contains

• The entry link first, so the supporter lands on the right page.
• The steps in order, for example open, confirm, vote.
• The effort in words: a minute, one quick check.
• Where a confirmation will appear, if one is sent.
• A contact for people who get stuck.
• A thank-you line, because voters who feel noticed come back.

A sample

Voting takes about a minute. Open the link, enter your email, confirm the message that arrives, and your vote counts. Stuck? Reply to me and I will walk you through it.

Follow up once for people who started and did not finish, and once near the deadline. The templates for asking people to vote hold more versions, and the creative and copy service writes them in your voice.

How do you pace a campaign and measure completed votes?

Pace by the protection, and measure by comparing what you can see: visits from your tracked links, the entry counter and what supporters tell you.

• With confirmation or sign-up steps, send asks in small waves so you can answer questions before the next wave goes out.
• With daily limits, plan a reminder cycle across the whole contest period instead of one burst.
• With network or device limits, spread asks across homes, workplaces and schools so that groups do not meet one shared limit.
• With jury hybrids, keep public promotion and jury material on separate tracks.

Reading the gap

Tracked visits show who arrived. The counter shows what was counted. The gap between them is the friction of the protection, and the replies from supporters explain it. Where the contest page offers no statistics we do not guess at hidden numbers; we ask supporters and compare waves with each other. Our methodology describes how we read results, and the seven, fourteen and thirty day calendar shows the pacing.

What will CoinMarketing Pro never do to a voting protection?

We will not help anyone get around a protection, and we do not accept projects that depend on it. The refusals are specific:

• No second email addresses, throwaway accounts or borrowed logins to vote again.
• No VPNs, proxies, cleared cookies or device swapping to dodge a network or device limit.
• No captcha-solving services and nobody completing a captcha on behalf of someone else.
• No scripts, no purchased votes and no click farms, which our no-bots policy rules out in full.

If a contest's check looks weak, we do not exploit it. If a rival's count jumps in a way that worries you, we help you document it for the organizer.

The next step is the free contest analysis. Send the contest link and your entry, and tell us which screens you met when you tried to vote. We reply with the protection type, the guide that fits and a plan.