Topic: ICO unethical behaviours - abusing your bounty hunters - name & shame (Read 591 times)

Yes you are very right with all these you have said, talking about CIBUS Token ICO, it wasn't a big issue to KYC but a big issue when you start asking for ether to send bounty rewards to respective participants, for some participant that is there first participation where on earth will they get the ether to send to claim thier rewards.

You can add Datawallet too; initially, they closed the Bounty after a couple of weeks; then they decided to pay the bounty hunters; only after KYC was conducted. If you didn't complete the KYC, you could get half the tokens you earned in ETH. 

P.S. Gladius needed KYC too.

I understand everything and wrote my vision.Also asking advice from the forum.If you have something to say ,then please tell me.

I don't think this is the place to ask about that. Don't you realize what's this thread about?

Now I do not remember all the projects which participated in the bounty.But here's the question, I also participated in airdrop but never received a single token.And regalsya in 30-50 different projects.What is the reason?

I hate projects that change rules in the middle or even better after bounty hunters did all they work. KYC is OK by me, but it is important to be clearly stated from the beginning of the bounty program. That way each of us can decide if they are OK with giving their personal info for that particular project.

---

One project I feel you can add to OP is Autorship (ATS). I am writing this from memory but proofs can probably be found if necessary. They had referral Airdrop. Each participant should have received 75 tokens for signing up and another 75 for every referral. Of course there was many cheaters and that is when the trouble started. I am OK with all their measures to stop cheaters but they decided in the end that they will simply not pay anybody with less certain amount of ATS tokens??? This resulted with the fact that users without referrals didn't get anything. Consequently cheaters probably profited in the end.

My case: I had few referrals and have received my allotted share of the tokens. I shared my ref link only among my friends and not one of them received their tokens. This was their first taste of crypto world and they immediately felt scammed, which is what I regret the most. Maybe it was a good lesson to learn from the beginning

ATS is worth almost nothing at the moment and i am not following the project closely these days. After that disappointment I just waited for a good time to sell them but it never came.

---

I have participated in the ShipChain airdrop and they were fair regarding KYC. They stated that KYC is mandatory from the beginning. I have decided to trust them and passed KYC without problems and received my allotted share of the tokens.

Well then, the project name is ShipChain. I was just afraid that it was just me who thought so.

Oh well, AFAIK the kitties have different characteristics that are encoded in their DNA (a number) and they can breed and mix pretty much as optimization genetic algorithms do to create new solutions, on this case, new kitties. The weirdest the beast, the pricier apparently.

In technical terms, kitties are an ERC721 token, that is, a non-fungible token an thus a digital collectible.

No, actually you're still talking out of both sides of your neck.  This thread is "name and shame", not "whine vaguely about something that's sort of a problem".  Either call them out or be silent.

All of these projects reek of scammy-ness to me.  I've seen so many of them turn out to be scams that it's hard not to become pessimistic--I'm long past the point of just being cynical.

OK, thank you. 

My mistake was that I fail to realize that KYC isn't necessary for airdrop eligibility. I won't say that it's their fault because I feel that requesting KYC is a bit shady but I don't know for sure what they are gonna do with that. I hope it makes sense now.

So, is it your faults or their faults?
It didn't make sense to me when you said "it makes no sense for me", while at the same time you said that "I think it's my mistake". Somehow it feels like you're blaming them while at the same time acknowledging that you're at fault for your illegibility to receive the airdrop.

Why not name them. By doing so you are protecting them and other could suffer like you did. What's the point in coverings shady things?

I have joined a project. It's an airdrop rather than bounty. Means I have not much task to do with it. But, what is bad is that they request KYC for airdrop eligibility and even after filling out the KYC, I didn't get the airdrop. I won't mention the project because I think it's my mistake failing to think properly. I decided not to join any projects requesting KYC for bounties. It makes no sense for me.

We should add Bezop to this list.
They don't pay a lot of participants due to "they're using bots, low quality, no contribution to token sale" and etc, but never show any transparency on their so-called investigation. Only some participants were paid (and with a smaller payment). No response whatsoever in their thread about this. It was managed by Tokensfund if I remember it correctly.

On my private list in terms of which bounty managers to avoid, I have:

1. Sylon - Half-assed promises, ultra slow to update spreadsheets, personal insults, etc.

2. Tokensuite (Member: needmoney) - Not capable of fairly judging work done in English.

You can have the best project, product or service in the world, but I won't help to promote it if you use any of these bounty managers.

I have been part of many successful bounty programs, but the ones that rubbed me the wrong way are:

1. Debitum Network Bounty Program - needmoney

2. CryptoFlix Bounty Program - Sylon

3. Bowheadhealth Bounty Program - Still awaiting payment! Empty promise after empty promise.

One of the projects I participated in was called KahnChat. I participated in it's Twitter campaign. At the beginning, they did not say need KYC in the bounty ANN ,then when they paid the rewards, they asked people to provide KYC verification.
Here is KahnChat bounty ANN link:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bounty-kahnchat-good-bounty-payout-join-now-2854032

There are also some projects,such as AstorGame, which unilaterally postpone the extension of time of their bounty campaign when the bounty period expires. The bounty pool does not increase.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bountyico-astorgame-bounty-campaign-3000000-for-bounty-2608398

There is also a bounty called the Symmetry Fund. After four weeks, their team has disappeared. They are a scam project.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/symmetry-fund-scam-2641669

I hope to open up a bounty discussion forum where we can share the various experiences of participating in bounty, and analyze together which rewards are trustworthy and which are untrustworthy.

I think everyone here has a bad experience in some ICO's. I have also a bad experience. I joined TOR-Q ALL. After we do everything to promote their project. We have not receive our payment until now. Those developers take away the money of their investors.

for me, KYC is a no-no in an ICO, let alone for bounty (or even airdrop).

my worst experience was with STORIQA.
saw them on ICOBENCH, showed up under the filter "no KYC & no whitelist", so i participated.
few weeks before ICO finished, they said "we're gonna do KYC because we want to make sure there are no criminals involved in our token sale" but they already distribute their tokens to pre-sale buyers, no KYC required lol.

for bounty/airdrop (because the line between bounty & airdrop is pretty much non-existent nowadays), it happened with CLEAR COIN.
at first, they asked participants to fill up 10 info (including reddit, medium, and linkedin, yes, freakin linkedin. what is this, job application?), then they cut it to only 5 info out of 10 required (no talk about KYC at that time).
in the middle of the road, they said KYC is required for investors who invest big (don't remember the exact number), and i take it as for ICO participants only, not for airdrop.
now they say everyone must fill KYC in order to get their token.

there's no way i'll give my ID to strangers for couple of bucks, heck no.
and please guys, think twice about KYC, why do you want to do it for only couple of bucks?

If you have to send a fee in advance, they're most likely running a scam.

I also support the process of kyc just because to avoid some people that have more than one account in one project, and some people do this.

However there is one project (cibus) in the process of kyc is very complicated, no one is able to complete correctly until the end. Even if you've done it, you have to send fee in advance to get token. This is very annoying.

In the end I left it. It's up to him, want to give the pay for my work or not.