Topic: KYC for ICO, is it good or bad idea? - page 14. (Read 2031 times)
KYC has both good and bad effects. If it is used for legal purposes, it is ok but sometimes we notice in the name of KYC, they disclose Identity to another dark sites, it is bad. KYC (know Your Customer) process should be easy for the customers.
KYC for ICO is a good idea and very important as it is work to identify the real investors as well as avoid the fake entry by spammers too. It may also help to create a positive and transparent environment in the cryptocurrency market.
KYC puts our privacy in risk. People can stole our data and use as their own. As I see, KYC do not give expected verification as someone can use another's ID with a his selfie. People are not honest and hence KYC procedure is not enough to catch real participants.
Yes KYC can exploit our identity so never give your personal data to the project that you are not sure with, KYC can help to identify fraud but if some people don't used their personal identity for KYC I think they add more options on KYC to verify such persons.
KYC puts our privacy in risk. People can stole our data and use as their own. As I see, KYC do not give expected verification as someone can use another's ID with a his selfie. People are not honest and hence KYC procedure is not enough to catch real participants.
Hi, everybody. With the development of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology,not only good ideas and projects began to develop,but also those who want to get a lot of money on the HYIP, use new technologies for their personal purposes. Projects began to carry out the KYC procedure for investors, airdrops, bounties to protect their projects from prosecution by the authorities, to improve security, to know their investors in person. But maybe we can use the KYC procedure not only for buyers but also for sellers. If we introduce such a procedure for new projects, it will increase the level of investor confidence, as well as deter many fake projects from collecting our funds, protect our crypto assets from fraud. This procedure can be entered in this forum to host projects or in special platform. The project developer will have to provide his personal and contact details.
Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
my opinion is that this is a good idea, I have nothing to hide I work on an honest basis, and the KYC process suits me completely, who is when I bought at what time, this is a great idea thanks to which the cryptocurrency will not be banned. Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
I do not argue that the greatest attraction of all crypto-currencies is in anonymity and any control over actions with cryptocurrencies causes dislike. Therefore, the KYC procedure causes negative emotions both among the founders of ICO projects and all its participants. However, we can use the blockchain to help with the passing of KYC procedures by all participants. For example, each KYC will be conducted by a separate transaction with an entry in the distributed data register, which will preserve the transparency of all data but also their anonymity.Thus, having passed the procedure of KYC investor, bounty hunter, or any other participant or founder of ICO can make a successful transaction of KYC in all other projects. A single blockchain KYC for everyone.
I'm not sure if KYC is a great idea for ICOs as we all have seen some that are scams and not only will you be giving them your money you will end up giving them your Identity which they can then sell on or even use.
I have no issue with doing this with credible companies but a standard run of the mill ICO in order to claim coins doesn,'t make sense to me.
I have no issue with doing this with credible companies but a standard run of the mill ICO in order to claim coins doesn,'t make sense to me.
Well, it is, in fact, both, a good or a bad idea. It varies from entity to entity. For example, if you think from the perspective of ICO investors and bounty hunters, it is bad. Most of the ICO investors don't want to give their identity to other persons, same go for bounty hunters. On the other hand, if you think as a project owner, ICO is good since they need to provide valid information to the govt about their business.
Now everyone is already starting to think, but why is it needed all the same? Because it is a necessity that the SEC has integrated, but do you think it is right? I think that in general it is right if we want to move on and accept serious investors, but there are a lot of conditions here.
from the start of KYC was a failure. because blockchain is anonymous, so if kyc is still enforced isn't that a disability for Blockchain technology. I support the creation of quality projects, for that regulation is needed to regulate it.
Hi, everybody. With the development of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology,not only good ideas and projects began to develop,but also those who want to get a lot of money on the HYIP, use new technologies for their personal purposes. Projects began to carry out the KYC procedure for investors, airdrops, bounties to protect their projects from prosecution by the authorities, to improve security, to know their investors in person. But maybe we can use the KYC procedure not only for buyers but also for sellers. If we introduce such a procedure for new projects, it will increase the level of investor confidence, as well as deter many fake projects from collecting our funds, protect our crypto assets from fraud. This procedure can be entered in this forum to host projects or in special platform. The project developer will have to provide his personal and contact details.
Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
I think some countries are already doing that like for example the United states,South Korea and Even the Philippines according to the SEC article that in the Philippines all ICO and other CrowdFunding activities are considered as Securities and their Founders and Team members should undergo a KYC procedure Before they can proceed to Initial Coin/Token Offerings.
It's one thing when a project wants to know investors personally, and another is bounty hunters. Here I see no reason to apply KYC.
i think that's good. it can reduce money laundrying. the government has made that regulation
an ICO must do that in order to get approved
an ICO must do that in order to get approved
Hi, everybody. With the development of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology,not only good ideas and projects began to develop,but also those who want to get a lot of money on the HYIP, use new technologies for their personal purposes. Projects began to carry out the KYC procedure for investors, airdrops, bounties to protect their projects from prosecution by the authorities, to improve security, to know their investors in person. But maybe we can use the KYC procedure not only for buyers but also for sellers. If we introduce such a procedure for new projects, it will increase the level of investor confidence, as well as deter many fake projects from collecting our funds, protect our crypto assets from fraud. This procedure can be entered in this forum to host projects or in special platform. The project developer will have to provide his personal and contact details.
Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
As decentralized cryptocurrency a KYC for both parties is not necessary but because we both avoiding a scam ICO and scam project , then we should to follow but ofcourse you have all the option of not to follow , although this will not give assurance that investors will really attract on this.
KYC procedures for ICOs is very important in order to build confidence in crypto market , but firstly , this procedure must be applied on ICOs owners , so don't buy from ICOs which you don't know their owners identity.
It is certainly necessary, it is the legal regulations of the United States or Europe are required to do that. Including the ban on capital mobilization from banned countries
I don't see anything good in today's KYC. I can find someone's passport on the internet and send it during pass a KYC. I think it needs some improvement and after this KYC will make sense
I agree with you and it seems to me that this is a very good idea that will bring confidence in the project team to the ISO process. What is happening now in most iso projects is a scam. Investors do not know anything about the team, only their photos on the main page or the pages on social networks that may be fake.
But I also do not understand those investors who give their money to such and projects.
Investstry is another matter. I myself am a member of the company for generosity. Therefore, KYC do not understand. I am at the registration fill all the appropriate items. Then after a long period of time you need to fill KYC to what it is. In KYC, there are points in which I really can not figure it out, but there is no video. That's what to do. But I also do not understand those investors who give their money to such and projects.
I believe that KYC testing plays a more negative role in ICO than a positive one. When buying new tons in ICO, investors actually exchange Bitcoin, etbereum, less often another cryptocurrency for these new tokens. If a person already has a cryptocurrency, why again demand confidential data from him? . What kind of cryptocurrency, if at every step we report not only their data, then send copies of their documents? And who, in projects that are 80 percent fraudulent.
However, the paradox is that such a check is demanded from the participants of the campaign by the generosity of the ICO, who are in no way connected with the payment of cryptocurrency or other types of money. This is clearly illegal. By the way, not a single ICO team indicated the document on the basis of which they demand to pass a KYC test from bounty hunters. This is the usual arbitrariness, and sometimes fraud.
However, the paradox is that such a check is demanded from the participants of the campaign by the generosity of the ICO, who are in no way connected with the payment of cryptocurrency or other types of money. This is clearly illegal. By the way, not a single ICO team indicated the document on the basis of which they demand to pass a KYC test from bounty hunters. This is the usual arbitrariness, and sometimes fraud.
cryptocurrency market theme was anonymity but with KYC, that purpose quashed. I am in favor of it as the purpose to get it is to know the real credentials of investors.
Jump to: