Yes, there are lots of ICO that hold bounties and do not pay.
I suggest to share the list of reliable bounties. Personally, I'm a member of this bounty for now https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bounty-lukki-exchange-bounty-review-a-chance-to-win-125-50-and-25-5156163
P.S. Do not consider it as a promotion
Topic: Flag For ICO Projects That Scam Bounty Hunters - page 2. (Read 316 times)
I totally agree with your opinion! Bounty hunters are like cheap workers. They work monthly and get back is nothing by scam projects, or not paying for bounty hunter. But what effect will flagging have? Do we take more time to flag scam projects?
Of course, I agree with this proposal. And this seems to have started to be done in several bounty programs that have not distributed rewards for so long or in bounty programs that are suspected of being scams. This can also be aimed at Bounty Managers so they can be more careful in promoting new bounties. We are often harmed, with the Flag probably not going to have much effect, but at least we have tried.
for me as a bounty hunter it will of course mark projects that do not pay bounty hunters and report that the account is affected by redtrust. the most important thing is to receive tokens and not make it difficult for bounty hunters. I refuse if there is KYC at the end of the distribution, it should be announced at the beginning when the bounty starts.
I think this flag is very cool we can flag and give warnings to potential investors ICO that has a bad reputation and people can support that flag.
Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
Of course, we have done that for many projects so far. Projects looking for reasons to refuse to pay bounty hunters after finishing bounty are present in the Scam Accusation board, and then will be tagged with red trust. Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
YES YES YES. i am in total support for projects that changed their mode oparandi at the end of a successful bounty campaign. they should be flagged and also adviced investors to say off.
i will even sugguest that reversed campaigns should be conducted for awareness to potential investors to stay away.
Hunters are not considered anymore this days.
i will even sugguest that reversed campaigns should be conducted for awareness to potential investors to stay away.
Hunters are not considered anymore this days.
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 4282
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Flags are might for specific serious cases like a situation involving actual scam and not for mere discomfort like asking for kyc or delay of distribution of tokens. Now if the project doesn't distribute the token entirely or lock up bounty allocation, that's refusing to pay participants for their work (time and effort) then it can be considered a scam which should result to them be flagged but in a situation when due to some circumstance they ask for kyc or delay distribution every affected user can make use of the feedback option to leave a feedback on their account with neutral or negative feedback as they deem fit.
I have observed some projects change their bounty terms and conditions for a good course like delay in distribution or kyc requirements to fetch out cheaters, farming same campaigns with alt account so the genuine participants can recieve a fair share of the bounty allocation. Those cases don't deserve been flagged.
I have observed some projects change their bounty terms and conditions for a good course like delay in distribution or kyc requirements to fetch out cheaters, farming same campaigns with alt account so the genuine participants can recieve a fair share of the bounty allocation. Those cases don't deserve been flagged.
I think it will be very good and helpful if participants can raise flags for ICO projects that change KYC rules,this have been around for long time now and many have been cheated because of this
I think this flag is very cool we can flag and give warnings to potential investors ICO that has a bad reputation and people can support that flag.
Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
That should be the best way to give a warn for such a scam campaign. We have real evidence if that was not creating such a good cooperation with the bounty participants and we can give awareness to the potential investors. This is much better rather than try to take any other complicated way agains such a scam campaign or ico. Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
Your topic is related to this one https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51824246
Providing certainty to the bounty hunter must take precedence. I'm worried that some scams have made the hunter's job look easy. Bounty hunters are always victims even though they have worked well.
I totally agree, to give a flag for scammer projects who not pay bounty hunters or change their KYC rules. but, mostly bounties end few days after/before ICO. so, how do we know if they will scam us?
I think this flag is very cool we can flag and give warnings to potential investors ICO that has a bad reputation and people can support that flag.
Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
Do these ICO's deserve to get flag if they change their rules from no KYC to asking KYC after the end of the bounty campaign
locked their tokens for several months with no prior notice that they will do it
refusing to distribute bounty hunter's stake campaign after the campaign was over
What do you think?
Jump to: