Pages:
Author

Topic: A suggestion for ICO promoters and bounty managers - page 2. (Read 1573 times)

sr. member
Activity: 812
Merit: 317
KYC is not also just required upon the investors, but also for the team and the promoters behind the project. This is a must requirement, to ensure that when the ico turns out to be a scam, we know the backgrounds behind the team. And also we can easily detected if they have a bad intention of aiming to scam.

I agree 100%. ICOs in which the promoters refuse to undergo KYC should not be allowed to post in the ANN or bounty section of this forum. If this is implemented, then 99% of the scamming cases can be prevented.
but how to implement these requirements? I also support your opinion and I believe that the biggest problem in the market of ico companies is the presence of a large number of scammers. Moreover, to date, Bounty Hunters are used as slaves, while paying very little and in most cases very often changing the terms of payment.
member
Activity: 826
Merit: 11
Being a member of Bitcointalk for more than 6 years, I am quite a bit bothered by what happening in the bounty section for the past few months. This is what I have noticed:

1. A lot of scam projects are creating bounty campaigns and ANN threads. Once the bounty campaign is finished, they vanish all of a sudden without paying the bounty hunters and leaving the investors in limbo.

2. The quality of the bounty managers have gone down. Junior level members are acting as bounty managers and they often don't update the spreadsheets and sometimes indulge in cheating by enrolling proxy accounts to the campaign.

3. Large number of newbs are signing up for bounty campaigns, often enrolling using purchased Facebook / Twitter accounts (esp. in Social media bounty). The quality of posts being done by the bounty campaign participants have gone down quite a lot during the last few months.

4. Even those bounties which pay end up listing at 80% or 90% discount to their original prices and in the end the honest bounty campaign participants end up with very small rewards. On the other hand, those signing up with 10-12 multiple accounts end up with sizeable rewards. And it is the latter category, which indulges in token dumping.

5. There is no incentive to hold on to the tokens, as a majority of the ICO promoters dump their tokens in the market and vanish. If you check, the vast majority of the listed ICOs are in a dormant or defunct state now.

I have a few suggestions to resolve some of the issues, before the issues go out of hand.


I agree with most of what was said here in the post because it concerns about the bounty managers, the bounty hunters and the legit crypto projects and icos. This post is very considerate with all the people or group of people involved like the bounty hunyers, bounty managers and others and it should be given the attention to maintain the quality of works and also the credibility of everyone involved. Awesome!
sr. member
Activity: 658
Merit: 250
Being a member of Bitcointalk for more than 6 years, I am quite a bit bothered by what happening in the bounty section for the past few months. This is what I have noticed:

1. A lot of scam projects are creating bounty campaigns and ANN threads. Once the bounty campaign is finished, they vanish all of a sudden without paying the bounty hunters and leaving the investors in limbo.

2. The quality of the bounty managers have gone down. Junior level members are acting as bounty managers and they often don't update the spreadsheets and sometimes indulge in cheating by enrolling proxy accounts to the campaign.

3. Large number of newbs are signing up for bounty campaigns, often enrolling using purchased Facebook / Twitter accounts (esp. in Social media bounty). The quality of posts being done by the bounty campaign participants have gone down quite a lot during the last few months.

4. Even those bounties which pay end up listing at 80% or 90% discount to their original prices and in the end the honest bounty campaign participants end up with very small rewards. On the other hand, those signing up with 10-12 multiple accounts end up with sizeable rewards. And it is the latter category, which indulges in token dumping.

5. There is no incentive to hold on to the tokens, as a majority of the ICO promoters dump their tokens in the market and vanish. If you check, the vast majority of the listed ICOs are in a dormant or defunct state now.

I have a few suggestions to resolve some of the issues, before the issues go out of hand.

1. There should be a requirement that if anyone want to post an ANN in Bitcointalk, he must deposit 0.1% of the total amount (of the softcap) in an escrow account. For example, if a project is planning to raise $50,000,000 from the investors, then before creating the ANN thread the promoters must deposit $50,000 in either BTC or ETH to an escrow account held by the Bitcointalk staff. If the soft-cap is smaller, like $500,000 then the escrow amount should be 0.1% of that, i.e $500. If the promoters vanish, then this amount should be forfeited. Also, if the promoters go back on their promises once the tokens are listed, then this escrow amount should be frozen and may be (partially) released only if they achieve the objectives which they had promised earlier.

2. There should be a list of approved bounty managers and those outside this list should not be allowed to act in this role. There are a lot of trusted bounty managers here, like Yahoo62278 and Lutpin. I don't think that newbs should be given priority over them.

3. In order to participate in a bounty campaign, it should be mandatory for all the users to post their ETH address in the "Location" field in the profile. I have noticed a large number of spammers using someone else's BTT account and their own ETH address to enroll in to social media bounties. This step will put and end to the practise and will weed out the spammers.

4. All the bounty campaign participants must be carefully screened before the payout. In order to prevent token dumping, a few steps can be taken. Since the bounty reward is 1% to 3% of the total amount, the promoters themselves can purchase this portion from the exchanges. Or they can make the bounty payments in BTC/ETH. There should also be a condition that the promoters should hold on to 90% of their tokens for at least 12 months. (Because I have noticed that it is the promoters who do dumping in the vast majority of the cases, and they blame it on the bounty hunters).

5. KYC must be mandatory for ICO promoters and bounty campaign managers (unless they are on level 2 DT). If this is done, then the scammers won't be able to set up multiple fake ICOs.

I am posting this because now the real impact is becoming obvious. Experienced users are staying away from bounty campaigns and even very promising ICOs are getting listed at heavily-discounted rates. This can't go on forever.

Good ICOs need to be protected from the negativity in the market created by the fake ICOs.
Honest bounty hunters needs to be protected from the cheaters
Properly run bounty campaigns and airdrops should be appreciated and differentiated from the poorly managed ones.
That is indeed so sad, even in bounty participant side, there are also some scammer who are duplicating someone else profile to be used as their own.
They are hoping to get a payment by using someone else work, that makes me sick.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
KYC is not also just required upon the investors, but also for the team and the promoters behind the project. This is a must requirement, to ensure that when the ico turns out to be a scam, we know the backgrounds behind the team. And also we can easily detected if they have a bad intention of aiming to scam.

I agree 100%. ICOs in which the promoters refuse to undergo KYC should not be allowed to post in the ANN or bounty section of this forum. If this is implemented, then 99% of the scamming cases can be prevented.
copper member
Activity: 224
Merit: 0
Very useful tips for the upcoming ICOs. I am sure, if they would stick to these rules, they will be able to revolutionise the way of holding a bounty campaign or an ICO. Hope these suggestions will come true one day.
copper member
Activity: 92
Merit: 0
● ● ● CryptoMarketAds &#
KYC is not also just required upon the investors, but also for the team and the promoters behind the project. This is a must requirement, to ensure that when the ico turns out to be a scam, we know the backgrounds behind the team. And also we can easily detected if they have a bad intention of aiming to scam.
jr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 1
The fact is, we cannot hold it back and cannot go back. The time has come where everyone abusing every single step to get money in here.
hero member
Activity: 1750
Merit: 589
member
Activity: 168
Merit: 10
member
Activity: 334
Merit: 10
Global Trans-Fee Mining Exchange
sr. member
Activity: 700
Merit: 250
I think escrow matters in this case. many have assumed that the bounty and ICO were bad because the scam continued to scatter. When escrow could help to this then at least the case for the scam with little resolved. other things such as manager I think this flexible enough because it will certainly be a new manager popping up and replace the old. even though they have not experienced too but will need a process towards the stage.
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 251
I think KYC for ICO promoter and bounty managers just nail the issue of ICO running away with investor%s money and putting bounty hunter's work at risk of earning nothing! The escrow suggestion is also on point for those that are looking to raise money on this forum!
full member
Activity: 420
Merit: 100
The Premier Digital Asset Management Ecosystem
The idea proposed by the author is very good, but hardly feasible as it is not necessary to moderators of the site. Here everything happens by itself, and everyone is trying to get only their own benefit, unfortunately.
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
All of these are known facts and most of readers have already know it. In the same time, your post is good for newbies and newcomers.
member
Activity: 238
Merit: 10
jr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 1
You have made a good point mate and i will also add a point to what you have said my point is bounty manager should be nice and keep to there word.
member
Activity: 248
Merit: 10
sr. member
Activity: 812
Merit: 256
Noone would deposit such amount of money and about money there good and bad situuations, first if we would have it then most of scamers leave us its great but second many projects with great ideas and without money leave us too.
member
Activity: 368
Merit: 10
KYC for ICOs is very good thought, but I consider that it is too late. Teams will go for it only in case, if investors will push them pretty hard.

KYC with one groan is good. On the other hand, you don’t always want to transfer your data, it’s unclear to whom and subsequently it’s unclear how this data can be used against you. Perhaps it would be nice to make a portfolio for the participants of the bounty. Wherever both good and negative sides of this participant are recorded.

member
Activity: 319
Merit: 10
KYC for ICOs is very good thought, but I consider that it is too late. Teams will go for it only in case, if investors will push them pretty hard.
Pages:
Jump to: