Topic: A new look to KYC, from a customer's perspective. - page 4. (Read 1389 times)
KYC isn't a bad idea but my problem is when you are paid penny for a bounty that also requires, funny enough most of the bounties I did that really paid me well never requested for KYC
I've encountered few project that the CEO itself has passed a KYC verification in well-known sites and it seems that its working to attract new investors to trust the project because they knew that the CEO is real. I look forward to up coming project to do this as well so we can gain more trust from old and new investors.
I believe a CEO who meets the requirements has passed verification from various sites, which will be very influential when holding the ICO project and the results of his hard work are very good.If there are some cases that fail to be seen from various aspects, such as the project is too ambitious, preparation is not mature, there are intentions to cheat, etc. which ultimately affect all projects because they make many parties frustrated.
I've encountered few project that the CEO itself has passed a KYC verification in well-known sites and it seems that its working to attract new investors to trust the project because they knew that the CEO is real. I look forward to up coming project to do this as well so we can gain more trust from old and new investors.
Most KYC procedure can be fake specially this ICO project CEO, can easily buy fake documents that includes selfie KYC. The best way to create more transparency is to create a team video and saying hi to bitcointalk community.
I fully agree with the opinion that team members and the CEO may pass KYC on forged documents and prove to be swindlers.
Actually the CEO is nothing more than the public image of the company. I would be more interested in knowing who are the developers of the project and in general, knowing the team involved in such crypto, what are the reasons that led them to develop it and what regulation are they willing to sign in order to ensure the correct handling of the funds from investors.
If possible, I would like them to be honest enough to return the funds in case the project is not completed in a timely manner; That seems more important to me than knowing in what school the CEO studied and what car he uses.
If possible, I would like them to be honest enough to return the funds in case the project is not completed in a timely manner; That seems more important to me than knowing in what school the CEO studied and what car he uses.
I've encountered few project that the CEO itself has passed a KYC verification in well-known sites and it seems that its working to attract new investors to trust the project because they knew that the CEO is real. I look forward to up coming project to do this as well so we can gain more trust from old and new investors.
Most KYC procedure can be fake specially this ICO project CEO, can easily buy fake documents that includes selfie KYC. The best way to create more transparency is to create a team video and saying hi to bitcointalk community.
I've encountered few project that the CEO itself has passed a KYC verification in well-known sites and it seems that its working to attract new investors to trust the project because they knew that the CEO is real. I look forward to up coming project to do this as well so we can gain more trust from old and new investors.
Data is valuable in the parallel market as it can be used by criminals to apply punches. We have to know to whom we are sending our data.
A lot of people were thinking about idea of Know Your Ceo. Of course non company which request us to send documents, will never ever agree the idea of making their ceo and team documents to be available. Seems they take care of their identity but don't give a shit of ours. This can't be achieved so easily, protests must be massive in real life in every country. It's not fair when some people can see everyone's KYC and we even don't know who the hell they are, it's very, very unfair.
I think people do not just invest on coins that are even unknown. The stories about scams are often heard and with this I am certain that investors are really asking about the team especially the CEO. But there are other circumstances when people will fail in correctly choosing the ICO. One big factor could be unpredictability of the market and the competition between new and exiating coins. Even good ICOs sometimes fail and it is not because they are just scams, it just they did fail.
So, what does KYC mean? I always hated that thing, mostly because I feelt it is an unnecesary leak of information.
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
Hole new way of looking at things. Actually the proof of the complete team involved in any ICO should be provided to the users. Also, I would always like to be anonymous in crypto field.
So, what does KYC mean? I always hated that thing, mostly because I feelt it is an unnecesary leak of information.
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
Investors should really gear up to this KYC stuff. They are the ones to be verifying these so called project team members with just pictures on whitepaper or website. Investors entrust their money to unknown persons, yet these persons still demand their documents for verification. This post is just the best.
So, what does KYC mean? I always hated that thing, mostly because I feelt it is an unnecesary leak of information.
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
KYC is because of regulations nowadays of sec and i see it was required in general to have a legality before conducting and ico than facing the laws after the successful crowdfunding. Everyone should be smart to look into the credibility and research on the informations of the team and not only hoarding in the project. With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
A bitter truth has spoken by this thread! This is the right time to be strong against all those shady ICO projects. They ask KYC for them who are supporting their project to grow, investing to make the success! 
This is totally strange! They should come with a video KYC, address KYC and all the original documents. I feel bad that we are not enough united, if we raise this question strongly, then project CEO has to response our call! But people still investing without proper investigation and they let them earn money and scam! We have to ask them KYC first before making any positive step about those projects!
Its not really needed at all for them to comply their KYC first. Seeing project transparency like developer/team existence would be enough. Checking out social platforms are legit ones and do really have that realistic goals This is totally strange! They should come with a video KYC, address KYC and all the original documents. I feel bad that we are not enough united, if we raise this question strongly, then project CEO has to response our call! But people still investing without proper investigation and they let them earn money and scam! We have to ask them KYC first before making any positive step about those projects! when it comes to their project funding.
The only mistake as an investor is that we do keep feeding those scammers because we do lack of some search or further verification.
A bitter truth has spoken by this thread! This is the right time to be strong against all those shady ICO projects. They ask KYC for them who are supporting their project to grow, investing to make the success! This is totally strange! They should come with a video KYC, address KYC and all the original documents. I feel bad that we are not enough united, if we raise this question strongly, then project CEO has to response our call! But people still investing without proper investigation and they let them earn money and scam! We have to ask them KYC first before making any positive step about those projects!
This is totally strange! They should come with a video KYC, address KYC and all the original documents. I feel bad that we are not enough united, if we raise this question strongly, then project CEO has to response our call! But people still investing without proper investigation and they let them earn money and scam! We have to ask them KYC first before making any positive step about those projects! Now, to test KYC, the CIVIC project team has released a good application on a smartphone, where you are going through verification and further, by scanning the bar code, you confirm your identity in the project, so the scammers will not cooperate with this company!
I have tried to do KYC at CIVIC to join in a bountyhive campaign, that's good and in my opinion is very simple, but not all projects work together with CIVIC.
So, what does KYC mean? I always hated that thing, mostly because I feelt it is an unnecesary leak of information.
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
With these times and all the shitcoin scams and real waste of time and money I came to the resolution that we need a new meaning for KYC.
Know Your CEO.
The best way we could prevent or atleast act in the case (most certain) of one of any new project being a scam is selecting a number of trusted users of the community to verify the "Team" of any coin just the same way we are verified in most sites.
Since most of the new coins claim the "Team" is the people shown in the pictures they shouldn't mind verifying it to this peculiar non snitch trustworthy gathering of users.
In the case a project is to be compared to bitcoin or ethereum and the team crave anonimity you shouldn't need an ICO or could provide code before launching and provide a service.
Any ideas? Would anyone actualy ask for this before investing? and keep the word and not invest without the check?
I think it is more than a fair price for trusting someone with perhaps thousands of bitcoins.
Edit: I has another interesting post few ahead for (for the ones that read op only)
I really appreciate you posting. This deserves thousands of merit. The main thing here is verifying the team members of a project because many just spring up now to scam investors. Wish I had some merit to give. This is the best post I've seen today.
Good point!
I told already about that more than year ago. It could be good solution, or ether CEO will be some fake persons..
But main thing, no KYC must be collected from bounty hunters
I told already about that more than year ago. It could be good solution, or ether CEO will be some fake persons..
But main thing, no KYC must be collected from bounty hunters
Now, to test KYC, the CIVIC project team has released a good application on a smartphone, where you are going through verification and further, by scanning the bar code, you confirm your identity in the project, so the scammers will not cooperate with this company!
What will happen the project itself turns into a scam.Giving the personal infomation to others has risk always no matter of who we are giving the information because most trusted site can even leak out our information or someone from insider stole and sell it on dark web.That's indeed any country has different regulation.
Know Your CEO is a good idea , if all ICOs starters pass Know Your CEO procedure then u will find that 99% of them just attracted by easy money making and scam intention.
i still dont understand why investors give their money to some unknown stranger with exchange of trash whitepaper and some promises and then Dev disappear or keep burning ICO fund by spending it on them selves and investors waiting for coin or token to take value while Dev/CEO living a luxury life with their money.
i still dont understand why investors give their money to some unknown stranger with exchange of trash whitepaper and some promises and then Dev disappear or keep burning ICO fund by spending it on them selves and investors waiting for coin or token to take value while Dev/CEO living a luxury life with their money.
maybe KYC system must be annihilated from requirement need for just buy some token or coin, as long your token or your coin sold in sale event, who care about KYC procedure, it doesnt need i think.
I am interested in your statement.My question is when a CEO / CTO / CMO submits the KYC on some ICO Rating websites, does their document check properly?
Jump to: