Topic: KYC for ICO buyers and bounty hunters? Better KYC for ICO & Bounties issuers! (Read 474 times)

I am not aware of this topic having been raised. But given the anonimity and heterogenity of most bounty hunters it may not be easy to do. Moreover, many bounty hunters are from third world countries where the concept itself of an union of workers is basically meaningless. Many of them are just pathetically submissive towards bounty managers, alwats buttlicking and/or whining, a total lack of human dignity. They wouldn't join any union I guess.

This is really a very big problem right now. Last year about a third of the ICO projects turned out to be fraudulent. We handed over our personal data and copies of our passports directly to the fraudsters. This is very bad. Scammers collect any of our personal data on the site on which we are anonymous. This is also absurd, since the generosity campaign participants do not invest in ICO projects, and therefore it makes no sense to require them to provide identification information, the meaning of which is to exclude the possible attraction of money obtained illegally. If any authorities authorized these ICO campaigns to conduct KYC, then first of all it was necessary to check these ICO teams to exclude fraud on their part. The need for such a verification, as well as the very regulation of the conduct of the ICO has long been ripe.

In the Russian local section tried to raise the topic of the trade union for bounty hunters, but it was not very popular. In the main section of the forum there are similar ideas?

In the Russian local section tried to raise the topic of the trade union for bounty hunters, but it was not very popular. In the main section of the forum there are similar ideas?

Of course one would avoid a non convincing ICO team, not to speak about most of the anonymous ones. However there are cases where bounty hunters are asked a KYC only AFTER that they have done all their job, with the blackmailing that if they refuse they will not be paid. LiveStars has just done that. Like that, Bounty Hunters had never a choice, since they were not told in advance. They are basically getting abused, and there should be a way to avoid that. Like a class action, for example, if the bounty hunters had some balls and would not close to always be such whiners.

As for the ICO Teams proving KYC themselves... if you aren't comfortable with the information particular ICO team has provided about themselves, then avoid it.

The tendence is rising to legally impose a KYC (Know Your Customer) procedure to people willing to buy tokens at an ICO. At the same time there have been rumors a KYC possibly to be imposed also to bounty hunters taking part to bounty campaigns. Polymath has already imposed a KYC procedure to anyone willing to receive its airdrop.
I'm not entering here the discussion, which has already been made in countless other threads, if those KYC are a good or a bad idea.
But I'd like to open here a discussion whether it wouldn't be more appropriate to start instead with making KYC a mandatory procedure for people who are actually launching an ICO and/or a bounty campaign, rather than for those who take part to them. This is in fact the case where most scams and more damage are happening. Anonymous teams are now and then still scamming investors and bounty hunters luring them into projects which are only a simulation of projects. The infamous ICO & bounty campaign "C" just a few months ago, just to name one (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/important-update-c-15-bitcoins-to-share-bounty-thread-2494912). But I could make a long list.
Personally I'd rather endlessly defend the right of anyone of staying anonymous in the world of crypto as well as in the world in general. But IF one decides to introduce limitations to this right (which I don't approve), THEN wouldn't it be more fair to start the other way round, prioritizing the verification of identity of those who are in the position to take advantage of their anonymity to scam or damage the public?

The trend of integrating the KYC process for investors and bounty hunters is developing very rapidly today. A lot of projects today are forced to go through the KYC process for everyone. But how do you think this is normal? I am sure that this is not normal, this should not be.

Yeah,the security of the people who sent their IDs to these unknown people,im sure anything can happen with our IDs and it might sold to some cindicate,that will use our IDs into illegal activities and we will wake up one morning facing identity thefts that is why i dont really joining any of these projects,the bounty managers shouldnt require this because the SEC doesnt include bounty hunting with their regulations.

This is the main issue here, security. We know that information and data are the new goldmine today and in the future. It is the new oil. With the huge data analytics and so forth, this is a big advantage to them. Some are buying data but for them its free, and the sad part they can get it through airdrop. 

Since ICOs are not regulated, I don't give my documents to any one. I don't know who will receive my documents .I don't know if they keep them and if they won't use my documents for something else.