Topic: ICO standard for absolute investor protection ?? (Read 868 times)

Perhaps we should look away from ICO or at least, stop calling it ICO as the name has been tarnished with the mega scam of many alt projects in 2018. By the way, you can take a look at IMO as a more viable means of raising funds for projects and protecting investors funds

Regulation is not yet needed but for the verification purpose of the team to prove if that platform has already created by the same owner was not faking his identity and i thought that's good enough.
When icos implemented some important thing as the standard in the past and that is helping a lot right now, just like
1. Escrow
2. Proof of identity by the team
3. 3rd trusted party to audit the platform

The verification has already done by investors that what we have called that as KYC verification is really suited to be used by the team too

people are not hacked because they have simple code, but they are easy to manipulate. The human factor is fundamental to scammers. Many are tempted by offers on shares where they offer additional benefits, but in this way users can open access to their data so that malicious services copy the most important information and gain control over your accounts

I use the words of my favorite song for the password, this works great so as not to forget the password and also it is complex enough to pick up the key to it. Safe storage of cold keys, preferably on removable media, is also a simple and effective way.

yes, but this standard will help people easily distinguish scammers from honest projects

I like most of your suggestions but without regulations by legal entities, it is almost not possible to entirely stop scam ICOs because there is still huge money to be shared in the market.

There will never be a proper ICO standard. Sure there will be ICO standards left, right and center, but they will all fail in the end. There cannot be regulation of ICOs the way they are being performed right now with ERC20 tokens being created. The institutions that are coming into the frame want to regulate ICOs, but there won't be the same valuation as current ICOs, no matter how bad they want to tax funds raised.

This is what is happening to China. They are banning ICO and exchange. But there are rumors that they will slowly allow exchanges and ICO as they have ironed out more rules and regulations.

they may not started with intention of scamming, they just do not understand how it could work properly for long term, and end up failing to do what they really want to do.  bottom line, using ICO to raise fund through crypto is not an easy way to get free money.  It just a more effective way of getting money, but investors at the same time do expect you to be doing exceptionally well, and effective in short time.

Thank You  ,


NO! If the cryptomarket is controlled by the authorities - in 10 years it will not differ in anything from the fiat market. The adoption of the standard is the most democratic way.


It is necessary only to popularize the standard. New projects may not use it - but this will arouse suspicion. Thus, over time it will become the de facto standard.

good idea, but who would enforce? Local authorities?

as for me is too much a little bit...
when you start a new busines you can't be sure that you will get any money back... only if you will put 60% of your meney in a wallet and use only 40% that are left.

Thank you, I think soon it will be time to make a poll and vote in this topic

These are some pretty good valid points and if you can really do a lot of good with this. It is really bad that it is uncontrollable but the only way for now has been for the investors to know how to fish out the project they invest in which is still not easy.

With some of the regulations coming up gradually for ICOs anyway, I am sure some lazy investors who do not like doing some research on their own will find it easy.

The whole scam shit is really giving the whole cryptocurrency community a bad name as so many people looking for a cheap project since bitcoin is expensive and most of them being newbies, always end up being thrown into the mouth of sharks.

thats not necessary a solution,

i mean i am planing currently to use ethereum because its simple,

but neo might be exclusive, or charge fees, or they simply just seek to give way to funds and startups they own themselves.

i have no idea about that,

if you folks want i can also change to neo,

and i will abandon ethereum if the transaction costs get mad, i am seeking a long term quality product, i cant have ether speculants messsing up the transaction costs.

however in germany the laws are quite strict regarding financial businesses, to strict actually it can takes decades to get a license because the burocratic investor protection is big that it is extremly mad and expensive and you cant start a new company anymore with a result that the system protects mainly the established rich, and owners, enslaving the rest in corporations those own.

regards

There is so many ICO that is really hard to find a scam and for sure need to find solution to stop this.

I personal stop to buy ICO on eth and other platform.

I will buy only ICO on NEO platform because they don't allow ilegal or scam ICO build on their platform.

ok lets break this down, for my ISO i am going to take you serious on this "blood pact" despite this name sounds like from a dark video game for me i would rather suggest a name like "Gerobits & Co LTD risk estimation service for ICOs and ISOs"


ok i hereby apply for your bloodpack ICO standard however my project is an ISO, i decribe my token as sources and entities not as cash or coins, because i dont want to be identified with unsustainable low quality crap scam and empty IT systems, i work substantial longterm oriented and strategic, i am a university great real estate and industry economist and engineer, i cant just do a hit and run, my goal is not the ICO/ISO my goal is to uplift and develop this brand


what do you want me to do for this paying money to the forum so my banners are everywhere? having a team of 20 smiling marketing guys?

thats good to reach people but its not a sign for sustainability.



ok we can discuss that, i am creating a long term alternative to cryptocoins i call them cryptosources,

my goal is the have a systematic infrastructure beneficial alternative, for cryptocurrencies, so nation state banker cartels wont be able to hunt Cryptocurrencies with good reasons anymore.


my token is 75% redemable for value generating sources that are strategically carefully chosen
i plan to increase efficiency later.
but the core goal of this is the establish this solution of ours/mine as a kapital solution people can rely on.


it will create the foundation of what we had before, in the financial system

mathematics, stochastics, rules regulations, huge industry with consultants and its inefficiency, then people will realise why jews are so successful and put their money into them (like maddoff)
till those maddoffs are fed up investing.



i am suspicious about teams that push around their internal responsibilities.

if a system is too overregulated and complex with to many consultants statisticans like the current wallstreet system/ city of london /frankfurt main/ moscow / shanghai financial district it becomes unefficient and expensive itself.

it start to get a communist style feeling and many smaller investors stay out of it becomes a place for giant corporations and their billonaires, and the mega asset managments.

they will not do smart microinvestments with creative applications but they wil build communist style cash cows everywhere, because they are too big, and the financial system is too paranoid.

this is currently the case in the world, wallstreet bankers have become communists. they lend mainly to each other and other huge corporations where they are sitting inside.

but you dont have to be afraid about that currently, the blockchain financial system however will develop itself into that direction.

only huge corporations will then be able to fill out those higly complicated forms thick like a bible,

thats the issue in wallstreet and city of london currently, so they are now gambling with mathematic models with stocks and cryptocurrencies while living on the back of the popluation when they lend money to each other.

young enterpreneurs are fed up working with them and rather prefer creating new currencies. thats what wer see with blockchain tech


its just a sidenote regarding the word "absolute" protection

there will be always a rest risk but you can reach the status "riskaverse"

regards

sorry, but I did not understand you. Can you explain more?

belive me folks that "absolute" investor protection will also lead you to be ignored by people that have simply no time for you

regards

For the beginnings we should maximize the idea. We can talk new ICO - Guys, I'm ready to give you money if you use Blood Pact ICO standard!


It can change the market very quickly!

That's sound great! I completely support these ideas. These rules help investors control the devs. But how can apply these standards for ICOs? Who will do that?

Alot of very interesting ideas have been suggested here, but no one has touch on accountability, imagine the level of inside trading in the space, selling their tokens to their cronies eg Chainlink, and will start to dump immediately the token enter the market at 2x the ICO price.

Thank you  , I really believe in this idea. I need to get as many community feedbacks as possible.

Yes, but I think it would be cool if the crypto community itself worked out a standard for conducting ICO. It is not known what will result from the intervention of the SEC,
this can have negative consequences.

bitcoin costs so much the same way and because you can be sure - no one will steal it from you. Imagine if your bitcoin was saved on the accounts of people who might disappear at any moment..


the introduction of normal standards, does not contradict the decentralization

I agree with you, but I think that many will object. This adds credibility, but it is better that the cryptoworld standard depends only on the cryptoworld.

It seems a bit unfair to demand any guarantees from ICO projects. The very idea that is based on decentralisation doesn't assume any guarantee i believe. It is just as the case with bitcoin. It costs 5 thousand dollard just because people believe in it

The problem is you can fake many things. And the crypto world is still new for us to trust something.
Registration of ICO issuing company in the legislation of some country could also be a plus point.

Thx.
I think the community can impose a standard! It is enough that as many people as possible learn about this. If we can develop clear rules - people will start asking ico-projects Do you follow the BPI standard? .

and then it is only a matter of time

For me, I don't think there is need for an ICO project to collect their funds onces, collect the fund as progress is made and give priority to the early investors. I don't think the developers are scamming people my main concern is how the burn the funds

Nice proposal! You should not give up on this if you feel it need to be done. You may be bring revolution that will better the ICO issuance and help the whole ecosystem of ICO and crypto currency in general. Thump up!

to minimize the incident we must provide the regulation with firm action to every Investor and member. with this will have a positive effect on everyone.

I think sec will come soon with his own rules.Working product at least usable beta,alpha,voting system,community need to buy rights together with token,publicly availabe info about company if any,adress,business number etc,easy to acces source of information about devs,i can find more but that one are most importent to me forgot to add reasonable hard cap

I actually think it’s a brilliant idea. You can put it all in a smart contract so investors will know when money is released improperly and that money can be released when x% of investors agree. Trustless system.  It would motivate developers to have to show progress if they want more money.

There is really a need to put some regulation to ICOs. This has become more necessary. It is needed not only to protect investors but to protect the entire crypto itself. If the influx of ICOs that are scams will continue, the established reputation of crypto will be severely affected and might even appear scam in general to people. Something has to be done. 

I think Artoken fit most of your criteria... Check it out https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ico-sale-ar-artoken-by-cappasity-decentralized-arvr-ecosystem-for-3d-2316185
what do you think?

I do agree with this. Alot of ICOs lately were just to have something to sell into the public and has no idea of what's gonna be in the future. I know ICO's purpose is to be an investment and goes with the risk of it failing. However, with your standards to be developed, ICOs will be more safe to invest with which will increase the demand atracting new people to try out cryptocurrencies. The question is who will impose this standards? Is there a specific cryptocurrency regulator?

Thanks man! If you do a regular evaluation of a ICO coin you are normally able to see scams that way. I made a video regarding evaluating coins and how to  evaluate them : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLwHkIKhddw&t=7s


I also have a BitcoinTalk discussion on my channel if you would like to join that here : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.22833213

Good Job Tim! I watched your video and agreed with your conclusions. Perhaps you have your own "antiscam criteria" for evaluating ICO ?

I agree with some of the points, you should check out my video on YouTube: Creating ICO Standards https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24c1Azp4238

Hi  .  I propose to develop a standard (list of rules) that guarantees absolute protection of investor's funds.

BPI,    Blood Pact ICO standard - this name seems to me very suitable)

so, let's discuss..


Problem: ~ 95% of ICO is scam.

Giving push to the popularity of ICO, the use of smart Ethereum contracts greatly simplified the mechanism of conducting ICO and gave a false sense of control to the participant. Indeed, only global cataclysms will not allow the participant to receive paid "supercoins". At the same time, the creators are not connected by any obligations, which absolutely do not motivate them to spend the money received for the development of the project. My personal observation says that about 60% of the ICO are being launched solely with the aim of cutting down easy money, another 30% -35% are completely unclear projects that have nothing but a 5 page site and unknown persons on the team page. As a result, the cost of purchased tokens strives for zero, owners depending on the laziness half a year or one year compose excuses - and disappear forever.

The main idea is that the ICO project should use all possible tools to justify the trust of the participants. In the case of a digital project based on the blockchain technologies, the possibilities are quite broad.

Escrow services are services that should act as a financial guarantor between participants and the project and give out money in portions. Proceeding from the minuses, this is not technologically, the services are new and they themselves require verification, it is an extra mediator with a commission, there is not enough flexibility. This method is discarded as non-technological.

The following principles are proposed:

1. Access to collected funds is possible only with the permission of the participants. That means, the team creates an application for the withdrawal of part of the amount for the stated purposes, the support of a specified number of participants is necessary for the transaction. (Implementation of escrow without intermediaries). Either from the opposite, the team creates an application for withdrawal, which will be executed in 5 days if 51% of the participants do not block it.

2. The team award is established by the community.

3. The team must identify their wallets in the newly created crypt (you can see how much your own money is invested, how much the creators believe in the project and whether they are going to run away from the sinking ship like rats.

4. Ability to return invested funds in the voting of 61% of participants.

I think the introduction of such principles will radically change the picture on the ICO market. If the project declares support of the Blood Pact ICO principles - it can be trusted, it is not worthwhile to look at others.

The price of the token from the usual ICO in the first stage depends only on the participants' confidence in the team, they can already forget about the money, they have no control over them, therefore, to say that the cost of the new token is supported by 1000 of collected broadcasts is incorrect.

In the case of Blood Pact ICO, the credibility of the team is good, of course, but the new tokens are really supported by a kind of "gold and currency reserve" - ​​which, here it lies and over which investors have control. This radically changes the picture, the token receives real security.

the idea is that if the project team says - we use the BPI standard, then it's 100% reliable guys

maybe I missed something, if you think that the above principles do not give absolute protection to the investor - tell me how they can be circumvented and offer your additions