Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 10. (Read 6947 times)
I don't believe these sites that give ratings, simply because, on the whole, this sphere can not be honest, well, or because people have such an opinion and only a correct evaluation of projects can really fix the situation, but now my opinion is definitely not to believe these resources. Because they can be bought, or rather their opinion and their evaluation.
I use ICO ratings in my ICO researches, i believe them but i don't fully believe in any information at all, so i take a look at different opinions on different web sites every times.
There is nothing wrong if we believe in ico ratings but if you don't want to be victim by scam make your own research after looking at the ico ratings. Just always look at the website.
I don't take it to the heart. There are some ICO with great rating and fail and ICO with a bad rating that succeeds.
Yes! One of the criteria and factor that is best to consider in joining ICO is having a good ICO rating most specially those well-known ICO review and rating websites. If it has good rating that gives a good impression to a specific ICO.
Perhaps I consider it a reference, because every criterion is just a factor. It is too risky for the ICO, ICO is a project for the future, the evaluation is just a valuation of the future
Not always a good ICO rating will make the ICO project a good one. Because I've followed a bounty campaign that has a good rating ICO but ultimately a scam too. So many factors other than the ICO rating that we should pay attention when following the ICO project.
I see that ICO is very magic and fanstatic and I also know that now one can predict the future of ICO. Therefore, I just see the change of rating but I do not believe in it.
I think any rating can be bought and I once do not pay attention to the ratings of projects you need to study the project itself and not only it is rating
Yes, I believe, because it works, of course not 100%, but it works. It's better than if it were not for these ratings and it's easier for me to analyze projects
I always do my own research before investing in an ICO. I do not only trust certain websites which highlight some ICOs. If you want to make money in this sector, it is always about your own research and information you gathered.
For an ICO bounty campaigns, hosting a third gathering rating your ICO implies getting profitable and legitimate data on the quality and the capability of the ICO. On the off chance that the result is sure, the aftereffects of the rating can be utilized for advertising purposes, since it transmits trust and straightforwardness. In spite of the fact that not all profoundly appraised ICO wound up sucessful. It is constantly better to make some self-resarch with respect to the poject that you will take an interest in.
I think it is wrong to rely on the evaluation of various sites . I'm used to studying myself, never trust the estimates
In General, there are excellent sites that can be trusted and that really show good projects. And on some sites you can buy these ratings. So you need to pay attention to such sites
As many people have already said, do you own research. I look at ICOBench and some influencers like Ian Balina and Sergios spreadsheet for news and reviews about upcoming ICOs. In fact the recent ICO I went in on all came from those recommendations, like Quarkchain, Sparkster, Credits, Arcblock etc...
I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.
Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
Icobench, ico rating, etcWhich is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
They review everything about ico, the shortcomings and advantages of a project they include there. Depending on how we respond, do they deserve to be the benchmark for choosing a really good ico. Some of the ico I follow are from there. Like today, wpp energy has a 4.7 rating on icobench. Let's see next.
The rating is certainly not the only criterion for choosing an ico. But in my vzlyad not unimportant factor that should draw attention. I always look at the rating
I use ICO ratings in my ICO researches, i believe them but i don't fully believe in any information at all, so i take a look at different opinions on different web sites every times.
I think this is not an objective assessment of a project. In addition, I'm sure we can buy a good evaluation. This is also a gift campaign. To understand the quality.We should try to analyze the project independently. But do not trust other people to say but we have to do our own assessment for analysis and choose the most promising Ico.
We have to believe that ICO rating sites have criteria that they use in conducting research. I think that some rating sites, such as icobench you can trust.
I don"t look at the rating of the project, because I know that everything in our world can be bought. Very often I saw high scores from scam projects. There were also projects with high ratings, which even soft cap didn't collect
If you are an investor then you simply have to look at such sites as cryptodriffer and icodrops. Look at their statistics, these sites are honest and have strong analysts.
Jump to: