Topic: [ANN] ICObench - ICO rating platform and community +Mobile App +API +Widgets - page 4. (Read 25657 times)

wow, I think this is an important thing to note because with the ISS in accordance with what you explain then later things like this will make it easier for investors to choose ICO quality. I hope with there ISS investors will have more confidence in the ICO is widely circulated at this time.

Glad to join the movement ICObench!  An excellent tool for investors and projects.


 

+1

How much time it takes to review an expert application ? I submitted mine around 1.5 months ago.  ( Grigore Ion-Cosmin )

Thank you and sorry for intruding

Yes, ICObench is taking lot of measures in order to control the fake ICO's and it is good way to attract the investors by investing into good projects. Review should not be based on money but with the real time efforts of the company and their team.

Agree with you. Generally ICO ranking websites only include details and information about an ICO project but in ICOBENCH, we can also to earn additional income by selling service capabilities that we have. An advantage that I do not think exists on other websites.

Great news, I'm happy to see that needed developments to ICOBench. I hope, that they are not going to stop there, since the regulatory background and the market will keep challenging the ICO industry itself and the ICOBench as it's most renowned proxy.

Currently, the changes mentioned do not look like a final solution for the rates quality problem and the experts' corruption risks, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

ICObench Experts: New rules for a better community

https://medium.com/@ICObench/icobench-experts-new-rules-for-a-better-community-d289903714dc

An excellent prospective project that has a huge potential market and will allow investors to receive passive income. Good luck for the in this greatest project.

Good project

• From now on the projects can publish their MVPs and prototypes and the users can filter ICOs by the availability of the product. Please send links to GitHub and other sources to [email protected]
• Even though ICObench experts rate ICOs voluntarily we expect them to be active members of the community. That's why we have decided to revoke the status of those who’ve been inactive for over 3 months
• No more double passing KYC! If you passed KYC as part of ICO team, contact us to verify your user profile. And vice versa: if you are a core team member and have verified profile we can change your status in the ICO.

You are welcome.

Also, this guys look very suspicious:

https://icobench.com/u/ny

He recently rated a lot of projects, many of which have ended months ago (like Binance, Friendz and many others, which he rated today or yesterday). None of his ratings contain any valuable information.

Probably, he is just boosting his rating to get more weight. It is certainly an abuse of your system and is bad both for the platform and the trust. You shall change that system to avoid this kind of cheaters.

About the email: I can copy all that to your email, but that is crucial to keep such information public, not just between us. It is better for everyone, if development and changes on your platform would by transparent.

Great catch!

Also, I can see problems with the following "advisors" at ICOBench, who are not picky at all and sell their faces for tokens from every project, that offers to buy:

https://icobench.com/u/david-drake

He has a crazy mix of the all different types of ICOs, simultaneously "advising" 70 (!) projects with an average rating of 3.60. It appears that he just take projects to boost his rating, that just looks ridiculous and pathetic. And several project under his "advisory" look extremely suspicious and have know allegation of scam. Not picky at all to say the least. And none of his reviews contain any analysis whatsoever.

https://icobench.com/u/michael-terpin

This guy was an advisor for projects like Lydian (100x flop from $5 price during the ICO to $0.05 now) and Worldwide Asset eXchange (6x flop from $2.05 to $0.34). His average ICO under advisory score is even worse, than David Drake's - 3.57. 23 ICOs, 11 running.

https://icobench.com/u/kteare

His average score of ICO under advisory is 3.40 (15 ICOs). And his only given rate was to a project, which he is a part of, what brakes the ICOBench rules.

https://icobench.com/u/borisotonicar

This one I'm not so sure about. Yet he was involved in a scam ICO and is currently listed as an advisor for Bitxoxo, which has a lot of scam red flags. 6 simultaneous ICOs (and he has another full-time job, according to LinkedIn), average rating 4.04.

https://icobench.com/u/jaredpolites

3.36 average score, 13 ICOs.

https://icobench.com/u/marckenigsberg

3.32 average score, 13 ICOs.

https://icobench.com/u/moe

3.21 average score, 12 ICOs

https://icobench.com/u/bitkay

3.2 average score, 13 ICOs.

Hello,

We understand your worrying and that is why soon all ratings will have mandatory reviews. 3 3 3 is not a bad rating though, just average.

Hello there, ICOBench team.

I'd like to open a topic on the value of ICOBench's experts opinions and whether some of the are not abusing the rights they have.

I am member of Vernam's team - a promising project running for more than two months now, with upcoming token sale in late May.
When we launched our project, of course the first platform we listed ourselves was ICOBench, as the most respected one on the web.

We started getting reviews by experts. Normally some are good, other are bad. The most valuable ones are helping us improve the project with constructive feedback.

Anyway, there are some reviews that worry us. For example this one:




Obviously Mr. Berger didn't like the project and we can't blame him. Anyway, he didn't provide any feedback, just the low scores. I decided to make my own due diligence and I found out that:

1. At the time when he rated our project, Mr. Berger was running an ICO himself, as a CEO - Pecunio.
2. 90% of the projects he rated at that time got really bad scores. See:




This makes me think that Mr. Berger used his expert status to harm competition in a really lame way. How will you comment this?

ICO Bench is the best rating platform

The project of course is far from original, in recent months more than a dozen have appeared similar, but the information here was collected mostly relevant, so I will keep track.

Why does it take ages for expert application get be approved?

I've been waiting for a month already!

Done, thanks !