How to combat the surge in scam ICOs - page 3.

Lionidas

hero member

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1012

Agreed to as well! Wink

Bitcoin exchanges charge atleast 3Btc to have their alt coin listed to some of these exchanges so why not here to have them shown to the bitcointalk community.

Call it a royalty so to improve the quality of the site.

But really to keep the bad seeds out of trying to scam the membership here.

coleman268

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

I think even with a fee there'd still be a lot of scam ICOs if someone is interested in scamming people for hundreds of thousands of dollars a one time fee isn't going to stop them from doing it. I think the best way is to do it is to make the ICOs have to be verified by the admins or something proving that the dev team are reputable and can actually do what they promise.

wizzard0

member

Activity: 63

Merit: 10

Quote from: BenOnceAgain on August 26, 2017, 10:11:53 AM

One thing that I think is sorely needed among these ICOs is a standardized list of terms. Some of the ICO whitepapers I've read have such horrible presentation and lack of concrete information that I can't imagine anyone investing anything in them, regardless of the potential of the concept. As someone coming from an environment where I have reviewed many (far too many) IPOs, the quality bar of ICOs needs to be raised.

I agree. A template term sheet with typical properties would both simplify comparison by participants and act as a quick sanity check for moderators too.

Works great on a torrent boards where a lot of similar releases get posted and otherwise need to be carefully sorted like "is this a reencode? what is the quality? what are the languages/subtitles etc?"

JaredStein

sr. member

Activity: 379

Merit: 251

You really can't. See, it is impossible to know if any ICO is a pump and dump or actually real. You just need to trust in the developers and hope it turns out OK.

HeroC

legendary

Activity: 858

Merit: 1000

I think that even with good intentions, there will always be someone complaining about a decision that forum administration makes. Right now we don't ban scammers for fear of an incorrect judgement, why change the way threads work? Plus 1BTC is still a *lot* of money, and I doubt they want more complaining about how 'the forum is rich make it more better' or 'halp badbear stole my btc and i have no ico thread'. It will just make people more upset in the end, it is up to the end user to judge if an ICO is a scam or not.

BenOnceAgain

member

Activity: 208

Merit: 84

🌐 www.btric.org 🌐

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 26, 2017, 07:30:41 AM

Thoughts?

Personally I think simply introducing a fee to start an ICO thread would result in an immediate drop in the numbers we're currently seeing. If you've got a legit operation you sure as hell can afford a bitcoin or two in order to collect millions in ICO funding.

I think a reasonable fee is potentially a good idea but if the fee were too significant that could stifle promising concepts from reaching the investment community. Or, alternatively, it could cause ICOs to shift their announcements elsewhere.

One thing that I think is sorely needed among these ICOs is a standardized list of terms. Some of the ICO whitepapers I've read have such horrible presentation and lack of concrete information that I can't imagine anyone investing anything in them, regardless of the potential of the concept. As someone coming from an environment where I have reviewed many (far too many) IPOs, the quality bar of ICOs needs to be raised.

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Huge warning with red and bold text is better idea than ask 1BTC for every ICO thread since scammer could earn more than 1BTC in scam ICO. Ban all ICO thread might works just like when altcoin giveaway is banned from this forum.

BitHodler

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1179

Charging a fee would definitely reduce the sheer number of garbage ICO's, but this doesn't solve the problem at all.

This forum is a Bitcoin forum, and from there I believe it will really help improve the overall quality, and extremely reduce (or even completely wipe off) the amount of scam ICO's by getting rid of the altcoin section entirely.

I know the altcoin section generates a whole lot of traffic, and ad slot revenue, but things have gotten extremely worse in the last years, and that's mainly altcoin related ~ certain problems require extreme measures.

boxabl

newbie

Activity: 31

Merit: 0

It's a good idea, and reducing scams is obviously a good thing, I'm just not sure how well it would work in practice. The admins would have to have the infrastructure set up to offer specific vetting services that would have to be the same for all projects in the interest of fairness. And what happens when a legitimate project falls through the cracks and is somehow labelled a scam when it's not? Or, even worse, a scam project is vetted as legit by the admins and people end up losing their funds?

I just don't think the admins here would be willing to take on that kind of risk/hassle.

DaMut

sr. member

Activity: 1274

Merit: 263

totally agree with that,
it's an excellent idea for me,it will prevent those shit ICOs without proper project and preparation to come up.
mods can not deleting the thread because it will affect this community and they might be attacking the mods which is will make this community to suffer and this the other solution to prevent those shitty project to come up.
while this community get a benefit from their existence.

cryptodevil

legendary

Activity: 2240

Merit: 1254

Thread-puller extraordinaire

There are an absurd number of ICOs being launched through this forum these days, far more than we can keep up with and expose. I don't see it getting any better all the while the scammers have a platform such as this, which allows them to use hacked accounts and bot-posting to set up multiple ICO threads for free.

Somebody came up with an excellent idea on the matter:

Quote from: coinits on August 25, 2017, 12:53:20 PM

If I were Theymos, I would charge 1 BTC to post an ICO. Then I would use some of it to vet the principles. Farm out the leg work to reputable people on here to dig into it.

While it will not 100% eliminate the problem I bet it would reduce it by 95%.

A chance for all to make a bit of BTC and make for a safer investment climate.

Thoughts?

Personally I think simply introducing a fee to start an ICO thread would result in an immediate drop in the numbers we're currently seeing. If you've got a legit operation you sure as hell can afford a bitcoin or two in order to collect millions in ICO funding.

Topic: How to combat the surge in scam ICOs - page 3. (Read 2318 times)