Topic: If an ICO team is anonymous, is it a scam? - page 10. (Read 4385 times)
anonymous team doesn't necessarily mean that a project is scam, it is a normal desire to stay anonymous for crypto, for example Satoshi. But in other way it is hard for investors to determine if they can trust this project.
I would never invest any ICO which has a anonymous team. Why they need to be anonymous? If you are doing a crowdfunding then investors have a right to know team experience in every detail. There is no way to pay for a anonymous ICO for me.
Not sure it is scam, but it is very high risk ICO investment. I don't recommend anyone to participate in such kind of ICOs.
intentionally keeping the team members secret is also good for avoiding pressure from outsiders, especially if the project has the potential to be large and good, many people will certainly put pressure on them.
This depends on how they can give a sense of trust to investors and followers, such as the way used by Satoshi Nakamoto.
It depends, satoshi did not reveal his real identity but he never lied about who he was either he never presented fake information to try to disguise his identity, he just make sure that no one could ever know who he was, he did this because he knew that in the future he could be accused of some wrongdoing if the governments tried to find who he was and accuse him of some crimes as we know it has happened before to those that tried to create a new currency.This depends on how they can give a sense of trust to investors and followers, such as the way used by Satoshi Nakamoto.
But most of the people that are trying to create a new cryptocurrency are not hiding their identities because they are afraid of that, they are just scammers that do not want to reveal their identity because they want to get away with their crimes.
If the ICO team is anonymous - there is no doubt they they are the scammers. Do not invest in ghosts! Always check the people behind the project.
It is possibly a scam , ico is simply called initial coin offer of a new company that is intending to come on board on the cryptocurrency industry. If they are genuine public offer they are making,is the right of the ico investors to know who is managing to their investment and their profile should be expose to heck their years of experience.
I personally try to avoid such ICO projects, because as rules people in this way try to avoid responsibility and become scammers
A good team has a great background. I still believe in projects that have an anonymous team. Like Bitcoin, which until now has survived and has a high price. Still sure and see the products they have. I prefer projects that have new ideas and different from other projects.
When deciphering between legit and scam ICO's, one of the main things everyone says is "you have a look at the team and see if they're transparent."
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
satoshi didn't asked to the people for the million of funds like icos today do.. bitcoins were intitially mined by the people not sold to the people so there is hell of difference between satoshi and the people who do not show their face.. i will never ever invest in any ico with anonymous team
This position of the team is alarming. The first thing I think about is that we have something to hide and do not need extra responsibility
at a minimum, you can open the faces of the founder or founders of the project, not the whole team
or enlist the support of a famous project or person
at a minimum, you can open the faces of the founder or founders of the project, not the whole team
or enlist the support of a famous project or person
but in practice even though anonymous satoshi will provide and have proven to have a good impact on all finances for those of us who have joined before 2018, because whatever happens for now is only a temporary problem, I'm sure the market will be bullrun so just wait and use your money to continue to grow in cryptocurrency, anonymously but very safe and better.
Well it have a high chance to be a scam,
So it is hard to trust some project that have an anonymous team,
So if the team is anonymous the project would surely have a small chance to attract investors.
So it is hard to trust some project that have an anonymous team,
So if the team is anonymous the project would surely have a small chance to attract investors.
I strongly believe that a team is the main aspect of a success of a failure by any ICO. And as investor I would like to know to what people I am giving my money. Maybe it is not a scam, but personally I would not invest in such an ICO.
I can't see any reason why a trustworthy project should have anonymous members? This certainly doesn't bring any trust into the project. In my opinion lousy scammers.
When deciphering between legit and scam ICO's, one of the main things everyone says is "you have a look at the team and see if they're transparent."
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
Unless the project is about a privacy coin or a privacy project initiative, I will not participate in any ICO that will not disclose their team members.
There were already lots of ICO scams and people won't be enticed to participate in it if the team is not made public.
So far what I have witnessed, all ICO scams had one thing in common, main founder or team was anonymous.
Doing an ICO anonymously (maybe with a smart contract as assurance) is really appealing to me, but remaining anonymous is difficult. At some point you will want to cash out and everyone will be watching your wallets like a hawk.
Well you can't really make such a conclusion because there are so many masternode projects that are running in the cryptospace which are not scam projects but yet still do not have any publicized team out there. Most development team and core team might wish to stay anonymous. It is rather unfortunate that most scam projects have also adopted this strategy.
Remember, this is crypto and some people prefer to stay anonymous. However, it will be in the best interest of the project for the team to reveal their true identity due to the recent scam issues associated with ICOs. Now, many investors refrain from projects with anonymous team because it has become one of the ways of checking scam or fake projects.
When deciphering between legit and scam ICO's, one of the main things everyone says is "you have a look at the team and see if they're transparent."
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
The thing is, the whole ideology behind decentralization is that it gives the public control over the economy's trajectory, rather than centralized and specific entities.
I see the Virternity Project, for example (https://virternity.com/), which prefers anonymity, but I'm not sure it means it's a scam ICO.
from their FAQ:
"Why aren't you revealing who is in your team?"
"The members of our team are enthusiastic about the idea of creating the Virternity space for the whole world. We want to avoid “buy-outs” of our specialists and co-workers, and also avoid pressure on them.
Also, given the limited financing at the initial stage, we are using anonymity as a shield for our technological secrets—the specifics of our current and future developments.
Many members of our team have serious jobs in major firms and do not want to advertise their participation in a non-commercial project, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
In the future, once these factors are less of an issue, we plan to publicly name the founders and key personnel."
Satoshi remains anonymous..
Thoughts?
There is quite a risk I can say, the project or ICO should be proud of their team members and they should put the credentials to their website. In this case, they will be trusted by the community. On the other hand, not doing so implies that the ICO or project is a scam.
Jump to: