Topic: How should we regulate ICO's? Let's discuss. (Read 295 times)

You have some great ideas there pal! And I strongly agree with your points. But as good as it sounds, I don't think it will be happening any time soon. Because ALMOST(not all) everyone inside the crypto world are greedy people. And most of them would probably hate your idea. Specially if they are making this a living. We can only just wish this happens for the better pf the crypto world.

There are difference between cryptocurrencies and tokenized ICOs. ICOs are issued by companies/team as a fundraiser for a project. They can be made to comply with regulations.

many people say to give the rules and regulate on ICO. it may be done but who will give regulation on every ico that will come dude? government ? bitcointalk ? or what ? see every dev freely launch their ico as they create and launch it on internet, and all people know that internet is area without rules ?

So then how do you propose new cryptocurrencies be made? Clearly it is going to happen whether we like it or not. If your solution is that every new crypto is going to be made by a starving college student then where do we end up from there?

Are you sure about that? What if a company makes an ICO and the lead developer dumps his coins and goes set fire to the servers building that started it all? And then he takes off to another country and changes his identity. If you are an investor, you don't want insurance against that? How about a tsunami destroys the same building? You still don't want ICO insurance? How about a solar flare destroys all the computers there but you are on the other side of the world?

Still don't want ICO insurance?

Yes mostly. I mined Bitcoin back in 2010 for maybe 3 months off and on, on my Nvidia card but then Mt Gox happened. I think I had maybe 3 Bitcoins in it, not sure. I remember buying an AMD card to mine Bitcoin better and eventually selling it unopened at a loss because I lost my solar manufacturing job because China trade cheated and dumped super subsidized solar panels on the US.
--------


I'm very surprised you guys don't have more to say about this! Are the majority of you here greedy speculators that don't want any regulation?

I agree that there should be a organization or a group of selected people who would regulate ico to avoid scams. The problem is since  ico is world wide then how would they can interfere with companies who would release a coin if it is not in their country. Now if there will be an organization per country who would pay them since it will be their job. Do trading companies need to adhere with their rules?

Maybe last one but I don't like these suggestions especially ico insurance is really nonsense because no one does that almost most of projects are already doomed to fail.

Avoiding some scams is only one purpose in my opinion, the other reason is controlling the market.

i agree with you, the main reason the government banning ico because of the many scam.

Are you really new to the world of crypto? While you are describing many Ideas clearly. The reason they are banning ICO is probably to avoid a lot of scam ICOs.

ICOs can not work long term reliably, that much is true so we should just get rid of them and educate people interested in them and show them what cryptos should be about; decentralization, trustless systems and transparency - none of which are ICO's about.

Reserved

In light of the recent ICO bans in China and S Korea I think it's time that we discuss how we should regulate ICO's.

I have a lot of ideas, a lot, but I'm not going to post them all yet. We'll just start off with a few.

My 2 primary ideas are:

OCR - Office of Cryptocurrency Regulations. There would be one in each country and they would coordinate via a secured forum and there would be one internationally or Int OCR and they would moderate that forum to prevent collusion and corruption. No OCR staff would be allowed to buy into ICO's that were in their jurisdiction all communication between them must be through the secured forum. Large countries with provinces or states could have an OCR for each state or province and so there would be a hierarchy for purposes of appeal the international one being at the top.

ICO insurance - There are two parts to this. The first part is ICO failure and the second part is all the dangers that the insurance agency will require including manmade and natural disasters and probably centralization risk. The ICO failure would be determined either on a case by case basis or it will be a set rate determined by the OCR. An ICO failure is the rate of ICO sales reached compared to your funding goal and the OCR would approve the funding goal so that you can't set BS funding goals to be 100% you don't fail. So if the OCR sets the failure rate at 40% of your funding goal and you only get 38% you have failed and have to give back all the investors money but you could file an appeal. The Insurance would cover all the operating expenses that led up to the ICO sale and the premium would increase should you file an appeal but OCR would control the maximum amount allowable that the premium could be increased.


The OCR has a set of guidelines and requirements that they will use to judge your ICO submission for approval and would be openly published on the OCR website and printable. You will either be accepted as "in consideration of approval" and if after 2 weeks if no other OCR from another couintry objects or has strong concerns an official approval and "good luck ladies and gentleman" letter is written to you by the OCR or your ICO submission will be declined and what needs to be corrected will be pointed out. If the ridiculous factor is just so high then OCR does not need to take the time to read submission thoroughly. At the end of the month the OCR will issue letters to all candidates that are in consideration of approval and will make a list for all other country OCR's to see what is being considered for approval for feedback or any objections.
------

I'm kind of new to Cryptocurrency but I can see there needs to be a gatekeeper that stops the ridiculousness. If we go about this some other way like only investment firms are allowed to invest in ICO's that takes away the decentralization part of investing and centralizes large pools of money in a small number of places that are vulnerable to attack  the way Mt Gox happened.

There are rules in place for crowdfunding, there should be rules in place for ICO's, the OCR would exist to protect the small investors without removing the decentralized method of obtaining funding for creating a new cryptocurrency.

What are your ideas? I have a lot more but I think it's time we diuscuss this.
If you have any regulations ideas post them and we'll vote on them as a community and the second post will be reserved to summarize what we do agree on.

If you like my idea of OCR's and ICO insurance let me know and I'll go more into how that should all work.