Topic: If an ICO team is anonymous, is it a scam? - page 2. (Read 4385 times)
Maybe but i participated an ico and the team is not anonymous and they still scammed us.
Not always. However, this should raise the question of why the development team is hiding its names and photos.
I would pass by such a project and would not invest in it.
I would pass by such a project and would not invest in it.
Any projects that do not show the faces of the developers and the whole team is a Scam! You tell me who is going to invest a completely anonymous project? Those who believe developers who are negligent to their community-fools.
Just like ethereum nowa has already stolen the photos from the internet and put them all into the ethereum scam nowa's site. No one interested to invest in the anonymous project even a kid will not do that.
Yes i believe it would be a scam if the team anonymous. In ICO's the team should show theirselves with their linkedin accounts. Otherwise i believe that there would be problem. The turstful projects wants to show everything clearly in their info sections. And also when you check the website of the project you would understand it, if they publish their ongoing private/presale or public sales results on the front page you can understand that it is not scam.
Any projects that do not show the faces of the developers and the whole team is a Scam! You tell me who is going to invest a completely anonymous project? Those who believe developers who are negligent to their community-fools.
With exception to Satoshi, almost every other project in the Cryptocurrency Space who did not show the face or details of team members/developers have turned out to be scam. So let's watch this space for this kind of projects and don't invest in them either good or bad as the case maybe. 
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?
I totally don't believe and don't participate in projects that the team manages anonymously. Why do they have to be anonymous while if the project they manage successfully will bring them reputation. And in my opinion, reputation is needed to become more successful.
It is no definitely a scam, but I cannot invest in some project without a real team behind it. I am always checking the ICO team members, to be sure that the project is legit. A pretty dangerous investment bro.
Bitcoin gives you the choice to stay anonymous. That is the inspiration that you have a choice. Now talking about a project with anonymous, they can be both scam or legit. Their work, actions should speak for them. Follow their activities see which part is suspicious, if you find any then talk about it if they escape or can not give you satisfactory answers or have a question mark then most likely it will be scam.I have seen crypto projects with good team scammed the investors. How about them? Can we say that an ICO with a known team is always legit? They can not scam you?
Not true always but in most case, they are likely to be scam. I have one case where the ICO team is trying to escrow the money since they are anonymous. So, they are enough fair. But if they are not willing to escrow the money, probably they will be a scammer.
Most probably it is. Why being anonymous if you're not hiding anything, right? In crypto eveything suspicious is actually a scam. ICOs should be always transparent in all their information in able for the investors to trust them. All info should be available for the investors to look at for their personal reference in able for them to make the right decision.
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?
I personally invested in one project that did not show the faces of the creators and organizers. What do you think happened? They went public and helped us make money.)
That’s absolutely correct that if an ICO team members are anonymous meaning this is perfectly scam
Why would a team that will collect money from investors will be unknown?how will the investors get their assurance of having profit if the person behind the project is not that trustworthy
So for sure we must not engaged of those people and instead find some legit team for your money to invest with
Why would a team that will collect money from investors will be unknown?how will the investors get their assurance of having profit if the person behind the project is not that trustworthy
So for sure we must not engaged of those people and instead find some legit team for your money to invest with
I think an ICO having an anonymous team is a risky project. Although, Bitcoin's founder Satoshi is somewhat an anonymous entity. But in ICO it is a different story. It is hard to trust your investment to someone that you don't have full trust with. So, better find a project who provide info about the team's composition so you can evaluate their legitimacy.
All projects with anonymous members are not scam.. But investing in this kind of project is too risky for me. Therefore, I do not agree with the ICO of such projects. But as I said at the beginning, 100% of such projects are not scam. So it's your own choice to take the risk.
Satoshi remains anonymous because he did not launch crowdfunding, you cannot link Nakamoto to any ICO there is a huge difference, and I don't like investing in any ICO that do not have a name on who is running it, for all we know it might a high school drop out who just want to make quick bucks, so better stay out on this kind of ICO.
Not really, because there is no guarantee that the project that publishes their team does not commit fraud. there was a time when bitcoin was released no one knew who satoshi was and until now no one knew him. then is bitcoin a scam?
It's not 100% but most probably yes. Why having the team annonymous? There is no reason for a good project to have an annonymous team, except if they have things to hide.
yes you're right, projects that have an anonymous team have the possibility that it's a fraud. what else do they do ICO, it's definitely scam
there is no reason for a new project, not announcing the list of teams behind the project.
We cannot determine that if ICo is scam only prediction. But sometimes I see some ICO who are anonymous legit and gives the investor high profit when ICO gone. In my opinion people are scared to invest to the anonymous ICO because they are scared to scam their money and that's good to being scared. So if your project is legit you do not have to worry to post your face in public because in the future you help other people.
Speaking of Satoshi, he did not promise anything to anyone, he just picked up and made his technology, so he has the right to anonymity, because I don’t think that governments and banks are willing to watch the development of cryptocurrency, but they can’t do anything yet talking about a project that promises profits to investors, then anonymity is useless!
Mostly yes. I mean if there are scammers the best strategy for them is to be anonymous, that way they can't be caught, atleast it'll be tuff to catch them so there can be exceptions but scammers will always prefer anonymity.
Most successful crypto ever created was bitcoin and still the team behind it was anonymous,we never know any details about that name satoshi nakamoto so it doesn't necessarily meant to be scam but this is also can be a strategy used by scammers so there is always risk behind ICO investments when we don't have details about the creators of it. 
Yes there is a great chance that its a scam. One characteristic of a successful ICO is transparency. If one is being anonymous, there is something unusual on the project. Besides why will you hide the team behind the project if your not going to scam the investors. There is no point. In an ICO, everything should be available for the investors to know what they are dealing with.
Exactly, besides, as I have already said, we need data from developers who, if they have already deceived investors, so that investors can submit to the police for these guys. Now it is vital. I would definitely have done exactly that.Jump to: