Any project that has nothing unique to offer, should be discarded. It's just that, even if this is said times without number, some people will still fall victim of their scheme, because they will so much paint the project in such a way that, it will be hard to distinguish them from genuine ones.
This is one of the reasons we need regulation. So that generally, investors will be project not minding their level of experience.
Topic: DO WE NEED TO REGULATE ICOs? - page 17. (Read 24801 times)
100%! some have abused the market. the noble intention was marred because of weak icos and faux icos.
Of course we need people or programs that will check the documents and the project itself that administrators provide to people , as I think all have a right to know the admins and their documents
Well i say yes! Currently there are so many projects with similar goals and visions and some of them even don't have the needed capacity and resources to see to the success of the project but yet still competes with the capable funds when funds are being raised. This has also increased the number of scam projects in the cryptospace and this is really tarnishing the image of crypto investment. Let's not forget that if men were angels there would be no need for laws. I am not talking of a Centralized Regulating Body but we can use the concept of masternodes and run a decentralized ICO regulating body. Let's explore all the possible ways of how we can actually curb this menace in the cryptospace.
ICO's should be regulated in order to eliminate scammers and fake projects which causes bad reputations. There should be a registry to all ICO's so that we can say that it is legit.
If the ico market is to survive, we need regulation.
Not only i think that and that is why it is the right way
If there is no regulation in 2019, the ico market will die.
Not only i think that and that is why it is the right way
If there is no regulation in 2019, the ico market will die.
ICOs should be regulated.
Not only most of them look like scam,but also there are good ones, but regulation is required to happen!
Not only most of them look like scam,but also there are good ones, but regulation is required to happen!
Well i say yes! Currently there are so many projects with similar goals and visions and some of them even don't have the needed capacity and resources to see to the success of the project but yet still competes with the capable funds when funds are being raised. This has also increased the number of scam projects in the cryptospace and this is really tarnishing the image of crypto investment. Let's not forget that if men were angels there would be no need for laws. I am not talking of a Centralized Regulating Body but we can use the concept of masternodes and run a decentralized ICO regulating body. Let's explore all the possible ways of how we can actually curb this menace in the cryptospace.
I agree that ICO needed to be regulated. There are lots of exploiters, scammers, and fraud company that will take advantage of a non-regulated system. Angels even have rules and laws, they are even strictly regulated because it needs only 1 mistake to kick them out of their status. We need to recover investors trust in this cryptospace else we will see the cryptomarket being barren.
how will you regulate ICOs in an effective way? without centralizing everything? Although I fully agree that ICOs are a total chaos and 99.9% are just an opportunity used by people who want to get rich fast, meaning devs and investors... people need to be responsible by their own decisions and if they do not study enough of their investment to begin with, they are only deserving to be scammed or mislead... all this starts with the people that give money to ICOs... these should become more demanding and inteligent... and the ton of fakes and failures will stop to get funded ...
if regulation is the only means to displace the scam icos, then yes. but maybe there are other ways to make this possible without regulation. i have read about reverse ico and that could solve the problem perhaps, without regulation.
There should be a regulatory institution or community for ICOs. This has to be. Otherwise we will see thousands of scam ico in the next bullrun. Collecting coins to ICOs. And they don't do anything.
For example, TenX. They raised $ 80 million. But there is no product.
For example, SirinLabs. They raised $ 40 million. But there is no product. Moreover, "6 months we have money," They made a statement.
Unbelievable!
For example, TenX. They raised $ 80 million. But there is no product.
For example, SirinLabs. They raised $ 40 million. But there is no product. Moreover, "6 months we have money," They made a statement.
Unbelievable!
I think this is very necessary, because the ICO market is deteriorating due to the increase in scams, and these fraudsters have seriously affected the development of the market.
It's very simple, to make certain conditions for entry and the minimum contribution, which will then be returned during the development and impact of the project. And in terms of the conditions let's say the finished product and not excessive requirements for both soft and hard covers.
It sounds similar to DAICO. And I think, this system is good to implement.Well i say yes! Currently there are so many projects with similar goals and visions and some of them even don't have the needed capacity and resources to see to the success of the project but yet still competes with the capable funds when funds are being raised. This has also increased the number of scam projects in the cryptospace and this is really tarnishing the image of crypto investment. Let's not forget that if men were angels there would be no need for laws. I am not talking of a Centralized Regulating Body but we can use the concept of masternodes and run a decentralized ICO regulating body. Let's explore all the possible ways of how we can actually curb this menace in the cryptospace.
Regarding regulation for ICO, I think it is necessary. One example of what must be regulated is that ICO organizers must register themselves or their teams in an ICO regulatory institution such as the SEC. Thus, ICO organizers have responsibility for the funds collected against investors legally. Even with this option, the possibility of ICO organizers committing fraud can still occur, but at least it can reduce it.
regulating ICOs can prevent this scam. there are a lot of scam ICOs today that gives bad reputation to crypto. if they can be regulated it would be a good move.
I think we will need ICO arrangements because there are many fake projects and fraudulent projects. A team must be made to examine various aspects. If the team has been created and is running, of course, you will make it easier for participants or Bounty investors to look for promising ICO projects.
Well i say yes! Currently there are so many projects with similar goals and visions and some of them even don't have the needed capacity and resources to see to the success of the project but yet still competes with the capable funds when funds are being raised. This has also increased the number of scam projects in the cryptospace and this is really tarnishing the image of crypto investment. Let's not forget that if men were angels there would be no need for laws. I am not talking of a Centralized Regulating Body but we can use the concept of masternodes and run a decentralized ICO regulating body. Let's explore all the possible ways of how we can actually curb this menace in the cryptospace.
It's very simple, to make certain conditions for entry and the minimum contribution, which will then be returned during the development and impact of the project. And in terms of the conditions let's say the finished product and not excessive requirements for both soft and hard covers.
all over the world there was and always will be fraud and the world of blockchain and cryptocurrency is no exception, if there are systems that will control this process, where guarantees that they can not be bribed, they will also put estimates for money, and projects will produce fraud, you need to learn to distinguish a good ICO project from a bad one.
I think at this point yes. Most of the ICOs are not anonymous anyway and that regulating it would have an effect in the space. Of course there will be some negative effects on it because tokens are meant to be decentralized and anonymous, but it's not the case here anymore. Investors are all about money money money.
ICO requires clear regulations because they develop projects through funds collected from investors so that there must be clear regulations so that the ICO does not carry away the money of investors.
ICO reguire more than regulation as they are now security and not a decentralized token and only coin that didn't raise money through ICO are not security and can't be regulate but on the issue of rate of scam ICO and to prevent investor from always been scam , we need a very good and strict law to guide any ICO regard crypto in every region and countries that such ICO will come out from .
I don't know if the government is willing to supervise the ICO. This is very beneficial to the cryptocurrency market. This is equivalent to the government's recognition of the cryptocurrency market. Perhaps Japan, South Korea will oversee ICO, and regulation can protect ICO investors.
Jump to: