Topic: KYC for ICO, is it good or bad idea? - page 3. (Read 2017 times)
ICOs applying ICOs for their investor because they following government regulation. I think its good because if they follow government regulation, its mean its legit ICOs.
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.
KYC is required to remove the cheater . Although there is a risk that the project will sell your information to third parties. But in the face of the increasingly evolving cheater that makes the bounty increasingly boring, KYC is needed. Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
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.
It really is a good idea although it consumes time but it do not matter that much in my opinion. Also, it will not allow multiple accounts in bounties given that it is prohibited and such way would promote fairness to all bounty participants. Those people who are against KYC might be doing some things which are not in rules. So personally i don't have any problem with that. Do you think this is a good or bad idea? Express your opinion.
It is a very good idea if KYC for sellers is more prioritized than for buyers because sellers are requesting for significant amount of money which are gotten from the hard earned money of the buyers in exchange for their tokens not yet sure of success.
Pretty good idea. It helps to protect your assets, as well as the project itself feels calm if the SEC decides to descend with a check.
I think KYC is a good idea for ICOs and bounties, especially for bounty campaigns, because it helps to avoid cheating like multi account spam, this is of course very detrimental to other bounty hunters, and therefore KYC is a good idea
I think this is a good idea. This will filter out part of the fraudulent projects presented on this forum (and not only).
Regarding the process of the KYC in general, I don’t mind, the main thing is that the obtained personal information about investors and clients is well guarded and there are no leaks. And the organization that takes responsibility for collecting and storing data should also be fully responsible for data leakage.
Unfortunately, no one wants to be responsible, and there are no corresponding regulators.
Regarding the process of the KYC in general, I don’t mind, the main thing is that the obtained personal information about investors and clients is well guarded and there are no leaks. And the organization that takes responsibility for collecting and storing data should also be fully responsible for data leakage.
Unfortunately, no one wants to be responsible, and there are no corresponding regulators.
KYC verification is actually a good idea but I believe some documents required for KYC should be minimize in order to respect the privacy of investors. For instance I feel uncomfortable when I submit my bank account statement for KYC verification because I see bank statement as something confidential.
I think KYC for ICO doesn't matter as long as all of our information is well managed. but I'm worried if later the project is a scam, our data could be used for criminal acts.
It was a terrible idea. Because there have been so many allegations that our information management project owners have sold all of it to others for profit. It was so bad and I was very upset about it. Hopefully this rule will be broken, KYC will no longer in the future.
In this procedure, there are pros and cons. Personally, I don't like her. Recently went through KYC to get tokens. Let's look at the result.
I see only disadvantages here because I don’t understand why developers need to know the investors' personal data. Their task is to engage in the development of their project. And how can my data help with this? Only my money can help. 
awful idea, as I didn`t pass even one KYC by myself and won`t do it. Why should we pass it?
Even for exchanges this is an awful idea (if it is not connected fiat)
This is one of the requirements of regulatory authorities and for the most part it is introduced in order to protect you, investors. Once you have identified yourself, these investments are recorded for you and you have the right to sue the company if something happens.Even for exchanges this is an awful idea (if it is not connected fiat)
In this procedure, there are pros and cons. Personally, I don't like her. Recently went through KYC to get tokens. Let's look at the result.
regulations in the crypto world are getting tighter and harder, including the use of KYC for investors and also bounty hunters. I think there are still pros and cons to that. but I myself agree with that rule, to further increase security and reduce fake accounts.
I think that the passage of the KYC for bounty hunters is not dangerous for the bounty hunters themselves, but on the other hand more or less good projects are asked to pass KYC.
With KYC this is quite good because it will be able to give trust to a project, because for now the concept and maybe the members of the team joining the project are not convincing enough, this is certainly very helpful because there are now many fraud projects which of course harm investors
I do not agree if ICO must use KYC because there is no more Anonymous, blockchain is popular because of its advantages as an anonymous network. without crypto like investment in general.
Having a KYC have both good and bad things that come out with so you should think twice in any Ico investment which you want to partake in.In that thought of yours about anonimity, Yes we shouldn't have any of those required KYC but in order for Crypto to survive we have no other choice as well as Crypto Ico to require the investors to do KYC.
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.
And I will say that's what should happen. And even the team must give KYC first to investors (at least showing on the website), not vice versa. Investors are the party most at risk of losing assets when the project turns out to be a scam.
In this situation, there are two sides of the coin, on the one hand, the KYC for developers needs that there would be no participation in their projects of scams. but on the other hand, where is privacy and personal data protection?
I do not agree if ICO must use KYC because there is no more Anonymous, blockchain is popular because of its advantages as an anonymous network. without crypto like investment in general.
Jump to: