Topic: How do caps influence the bounty hunters? (Read 157 times)

You don´t need to read any further. Any project that does not specify a soft cap is saying that they will proceed with the project with any amount the get. It is a clear sign of money-grabbing.

Why?

- The accept any money, but all projects require a minimum to stand a chance of success.

or...

- They already have money to do  the project, in which case, they are just trying to make easy additional cash with your investment.

So, there is a good reason why there is a softcap in projects. Besides that, the hard cap should very rarely be more than twice the soft cap, because there is also a limit in the efficient use of money.

I don't think a project can have two hard caps and no soft cap. One of those amounts, 4 and 6 million (you didn't specify the currency) would be the soft cap. And since by definition soft cap is the minimum amount needed to develop a project. Then it would be the lesser amount.



I believe the terms of a bounty or any UCO should be carefully outlined form the beginning to ensure transparency, so those who are not deep in cahoots with the team can understand clearly.

Not all projects are scams, i think some just don't generate enough interest because people don't see real world use or maybe they have terrible marketing skills. But there's certainly a possibility their ICO won't be fully funded then they will not be able to distribute tokens for the bounties which essentially means a lot of wasted time for everyone.

Obviously you don't have any control over whether the project will be successful or not but considering if you've only invested your time vs actually money, imo you won't have as much to loose if the project goes belly up and they're not able to pay all the investors back.

Hi guys,

Here's my question:

1) I have found two ICOs that I really like. They are going to kick off in 2 and 3 weeks.
2) I would like to bounty for them in translations and articles writing. I write good copywrite in English and Russian.
3) I am not sure that they will be able to deliver on their promise to distribute the coins to bounty hunters, since they might fail to reach the specified hard cap. I am not saying that they are scams. Here's what I'm saying:

a) they do not specify any soft cap
b) they specify the hard caps of 4 and 6 millions respectively
c) I am not sure that they will be able to reach these hard caps
d) If they fail to reach the hard caps, they will have to return the money to the investors, since it's the mechanics of the smart contracts that they use
e) One of the coins has a good coder who told me that they have created the ICO smart contracts in such a way as to assure the return-upon-failure-to-reach-hard-cap function. He said that I could easily ask any of my coder friends to check that.
The other coin did not say anything on topic topic and I don't yet have the oomph, required to pressure the answers out of them.
f) If the team returns the fund to investors, they will not have any money to pay out to the bounty hunters. This is not the scenarios that I want to see...)))

Does this make sense or am I getting something totally wrong?

If it makes sense to you, then how do I move from here to mitigating the risks down to the lowest level?

(I am working with yet another team. They pay me me real good upfront cash for articles and liasoning. And I write good stuff. I asked them about the bounty and said that I don't have to worry about that, as they will distribute a good portion of tokens a couple of weeks after the ICO's gone live, since we are going to go long distance and already talking what we are going to do the next 2 years.

In this case, I'm sort of vested since I'm deep in cahoots - in the good meaning of this phrase - with the leadership, and if the ICO fails and I don't get a distribution, so be it. But the situation with the other two teams is totally different, since I'm not inside and I don't have any idea as to their inner workings.)