Guys it is unfair to blame Bittrex or any other exchange that adds a coin. The answer is sometimes right in front of you by applying good common sense and looking at the risk indicators. By looking at a few things you can make a call on the residual risk of a coin based on risk factors and then see how that fits into your risk appetite. You can then either stay away or risk it all and the alt-coin exchanges currently just provide a vehicle to cater for the whole of the spectrum of risk appetite.
In the absence of regulation in alt coins (self or otherwise) you can do certain basic things to protect yourself: Elite was high risk based on such an assessment, refer here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7974656
In the absence of regulation in alt coins (self or otherwise) you can do certain basic things to protect yourself: Elite was high risk based on such an assessment, refer here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7974656
Is it unfair to assume they should do some sort of QA/QC of code for the coins that they add? The 20k genesis block noted above should have been identified, yes?
Well, the risk of that approach is that every coin they list would be perceived as getting a "Bittrex seal of approval" -- they then become responsible or perceived as responsible for any unforseen/undiscovered scams/implosions in the coins they list. Just saying, dont think there are easy answers here. Ultimately, it's up to people to interrogate these devs and call them out in the threads, with the help of techies who can see through the BS and flyspeck things.
