Topic: All rating platforms are shit!? - page 6. (Read 619 times)
Yes, Measure, analyze, compare their common standards to evaluate what is ico? or even for cmc. They also brought to the community deception before. I do not trust them when choosing ico to invest. and most of my use of thought and reason and measures to check and authentic.
I honestly do not like rating sites and for whatever reason I do not trust them. this reminds me of one of the projects that get high ratings in some rating sites, he is a Hash Card. But ultimately Hash Card scam and many people who suffered losses because of it. So a high rating does not guarantee that the project is feasible and promising.
Too much deception around, investor confidence starts to decline and the market reacts naturally! I think we need some mechanism to protect honest projects, some kind of association in which guarantees the reputation of the project, because all rating platforms are shit!
What do you think?
What do you think?
Yes they are not very great in what they are doing today. As most of them are just paid reviews and everyone knows that when there is paid stuff then it is mostly fake one. If every ICO starts getting paid reviews then obviously whats the use of that. All of them will get the same reviews and almost above 4 star ratings.
If all the ICO come with that attitude then how can one trust on single of them. They dont guarantee us any legit reviews but just attract in paid ways. Mostly I see them as paid advertising. As you go on the website and check that XYZ ICO is having + reviews and thus we may fall for it and it could be scam too. Better watch them out.
Many people come to this conclusion after they trust their choice of project for investment, but if you think about it, it's really so, because today there are a lot of projects that can buy the opinion of this service.
They are not shit. They just rate. It is the same thing as we all speculate that the market will recover one day and so if doesn't happen sooner, you can't be held responsible. Also rating platforms are not financial advisors, they just check certain features and use it to rate that particular ICO
Yes, I agree with you, I think only decent projects will be able to protect themselves, but here it is necessary to prevent any lobby under any circumstances!
Agree, there should be some type of platform/body that supports the honest projects. Too many people are scared to invest in a new project because of major scams. Rating platforms is just a business, you pay them, they do a review and i'm sure for a little extra they say something nice
Yes they are! Thanks for finally understanding that. They are just like bounty hunters, you give them money and they advertise you as getting you listed higher.
What we need is exactly this. An independent organization that will get paid for doing honest research. Maybe some of you around here could pull it off as an ICO...
Funny isn't it, the only way to save ICO market is to start another project
Too much deception around, investor confidence starts to decline and the market reacts naturally! I think we need some mechanism to protect honest projects, some kind of association in which guarantees the reputation of the project, because all rating platforms are shit!
What do you think?
We needs an independent organization or association to conduct ratings on different projects not those that were paid for just to make some good ratings in a specific project even though it is a low profile project or just to make it looks good in the eye of the investors. It would be nice if we will not trust this kind of rating system that will just make some kind of deception and confusion to each and everyone of us.What do you think?
What we need is exactly this. An independent organization that will get paid for doing honest research. Maybe some of you around here could pull it off as an ICO...
Funny isn't it, the only way to save ICO market is to start another project
Too much deception around, investor confidence starts to decline and the market reacts naturally! I think we need some mechanism to protect honest projects, some kind of association in which guarantees the reputation of the project, because all rating platforms are shit!
What do you think?
We needs an independent organization or association to conduct ratings on different projects not those that were paid for just to make some good ratings in a specific project even though it is a low profile project or just to make it looks good in the eye of the investors. It would be nice if we will not trust this kind of rating system that will just make some kind of deception and confusion to each and everyone of us. What do you think?
When you will have working rating mechanisms that will mean that all the market is divided all profits concluded and all peaces of pie are on their legit plates. Remember about that when you are demanding "fair and working ratings".
Claiming something is shit without providing any concrete evidences to back your claim is the real shit. Im not really against or with connection to any platform, but please do provide informations that can support your claims.
I have also obsered this but did not know how to put it. I have see project been rated high by some reputable rating sites and it turn out to be a scam. I have also noticed some very powerful campaigns on this forum and at the end investors are regretting. I agree with you that good project need to be protected and this can really happened by some kind of regulations.
Rating platforms cannot really determine the outcome of a certain project. So if you are investor, do not rely on ratings instead you do your own research and see whether that project is worthy of your investment.
The rating platform can't be generalized. I think a good project must be judged by itself. To verify the authenticity of the project. Don't rely on the so-called rating platform. Many of the rating platforms are not too transparent. If you want to invest in a ICO project, please be careful.
First of all, we can't trust rating sites because they are interested in traffic and money. Often ICO projects pay money for reviews and ratings, so later or earlier even the honest analytic can lie and give ICO the top mark.
You can trust only yourself when the deal is about money.
You can trust only yourself when the deal is about money.
It's true that most review sites are disgusting.
Because most ratings are unreliable, I don't believe in any ratings. I only believe in myself.
Because most ratings are unreliable, I don't believe in any ratings. I only believe in myself.
Investors are unlikely to react to the ratings, they first look at the information about the project, after which they just start to throw in money!
I always say in such cases that the only useful rating is something like TOP7 ICO table https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12bJmLfCf02VIrBg4DPrTeR_hqGE6V5dorgMglPUOwSA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0 So-called "voice of crowd bloggers/influencers "still works well. You can not trust one site/man, you can not trust even 2-3 of them, but if most of them say that NEX and Quarkchain are top projects this could be the truth with very high chances.
I think you are a smart person. Rating agencies must also survive. As long as there is a demand for survival, there are natural industry rules. So I do not believe in rating agencies either. I think the risk of ICO is here. Real rating agencies are hard to survive.
I really agree with you, too many scams everywhere and I also think we need some mechanisms to protect honest projects, but I think it's not easy to implement this, because I'm sure there are many new and growing fraud models currently.
Jump to: