Topic: KYC of bounty hunters - page 62. (Read 6981 times)
It is a bad thing like stated in the first post , people will get their identity stolen. I personally refuse to give any identification to any ICO. But that means there will always be people who will do it because they see it as a advantage.
I am this new rule will make the bounty hunter more difficult to do his job but it also has a positive impact because with the existence of such regulations will be more difficult to reveal a scam project.
hopefully the bounty hunter will be higher also his income so he can also follow an ico.
good luck for bounty hunters!
hopefully the bounty hunter will be higher also his income so he can also follow an ico.
good luck for bounty hunters!
I think that there is no need to use this technology, of course if you are participating in ICO - you need to pass the KYC, but if you are just a bounty hunter, for what do you need to pass it? For the reason to know you are not from China?! Or to control coins and get prove of stake? I against this system. ICO participants must be identified especially if in closer future here will be the system of debit cards with crypto
But for promoting - it's too much
But for promoting - it's too much
I don't think enough people value privacy, no way I'd be willing to send an ID for verification. Hope that's not just me.
I'm probably like many people here expressing my protest concerning the KYC process for investors, because it seems to me that these are not legitimate actions in relation to bounty hunters
Avoid, new precedent trying to be set, the more people the give in, then you'll have to give you info out for every single airdropped/bounty out there.
It's very dangerous for you to trust these non-reputable individuals with your information and for the future of cryptos as a whole, yet no one is discussing this.
You can blame Polymath for this, they don't want to work harder filter to filter puppets, so instead they want your ID.
Edit: There is probably nothing we can do to stop this, because the vast majority of people trying to do airdrops are very likely to hand over their info without a second thought. This has major repercussions, some of the worst repercussions we will see ever in crypto.
The best thing you can do if you're reading this, is to not give in to these new information whores, who are more than likely to flip your IDs on the darkweb for a profit.
It's very dangerous for you to trust these non-reputable individuals with your information and for the future of cryptos as a whole, yet no one is discussing this.
You can blame Polymath for this, they don't want to work harder filter to filter puppets, so instead they want your ID.
Edit: There is probably nothing we can do to stop this, because the vast majority of people trying to do airdrops are very likely to hand over their info without a second thought. This has major repercussions, some of the worst repercussions we will see ever in crypto.
The best thing you can do if you're reading this, is to not give in to these new information whores, who are more than likely to flip your IDs on the darkweb for a profit.
I agree, it is not a good trend and I fear it will only become worse in the future. Pay attention by sending your ID documents to the ICOs!
In other words we should do more investigation before we submit KYC in some ICO's. We should more aware that this process is not safe because our identities will be use for some scam intentions. We should double check before we apply because its only for the safetiness for the sake of our personalities.
Soon this expectations will be also true and there is nothing we can do about it.
As for me - it's absolutely OK since you are not multi-account holder and a person from the crypto-friendly country. What's wrong with that?
Bounty programs are asking bounty hunters to do KYC before they are paid for work done . What do you think of this development.
Bounty shares is just a small slice on the whole sales and this will be distributed to many bounty hunters. Asking KYC for that small amount of tokens is not worth as we give them our identity. Our identity will be exposed and may use for illegal activities. I'm not favor on that directives. 
i support bounties which ask kyc. at least no scammers able to join the campaign.
i joined gbx bounty, it wants kyc to join bounty. the projects gain huge success, and less bounty participants.
Is it related to Scammer ?, I think with the new rules the scammer has difficulty moving.i joined gbx bounty, it wants kyc to join bounty. the projects gain huge success, and less bounty participants.
KYC will make a lonely thread bounty, even rules for multi accounts are still unclear.
The participants of this forum who join the signature campaign to promote a certain ICO project do not invest their money and this project, and therefore they can not be suspected of money laundering or other similar illegal actions. Therefore, it makes no sense to require from them data identifying their identity and especially copies of the relevant documents. Especially it looks strange in the sense that people are on this forum only under pseudonyms and have the right to confidentiality.
I see that members of the ICO team are using this opportunity with purely fraudulent goals. The requirement to provide additional data appears for some reason, not before joining the campaign, when each member of the forum can refuse such accession, and after the completion of the ICO, when the agreed work is already completed and the signatory campaign participants expect to pay the earned tokens. In this case, there is no choice for a signatory campaign participant who does not want to publish his data and provide copies of identity documents. They will in case of disagreement have to just abandon the earned tokens and this is what some companies are counting on. In this case, tokens are already counted and if someone does not claim them, they are simply assigned.
I see that members of the ICO team are using this opportunity with purely fraudulent goals. The requirement to provide additional data appears for some reason, not before joining the campaign, when each member of the forum can refuse such accession, and after the completion of the ICO, when the agreed work is already completed and the signatory campaign participants expect to pay the earned tokens. In this case, there is no choice for a signatory campaign participant who does not want to publish his data and provide copies of identity documents. They will in case of disagreement have to just abandon the earned tokens and this is what some companies are counting on. In this case, tokens are already counted and if someone does not claim them, they are simply assigned.
Totaly agree. I'm against the KYC for bounty hunters, I don't think it's necessary since we are not investors. But if a project wants to request the KYC to the participants of its bounty campaign, of course it can do it, it's in their right. BUT they must indicate it at the beginning of the campaign, so that we can choose. What is a real injustice is to ask for KYC when the campaign has finished: "Either you accept our last-minute imposition, or you leave with nothing".
I don't like KYC verification. I want to be able to choose if I accept it or not. Recently the projects are notifying this when it is too late and you have already invested time in them. Then you have two options, or you give your data compulsorily if you don't want to waste your time, or you assume the loss of time.
This process should be announced from the beginning. We are talking about personal data. We must take the risks or not.
An ICO investor knows from the beginning if he has to give his ID or passport, we don't, we find out at the end. It's not fair. The rest of the arguments such as preventing multi-accounts seem out of place because the problem is not that. The projects announce this in the end on purpose because they know that if they announce it at the beginning less people will participate.
I think we are being very conformist with this. Giving personal information is a risk that not everyone wants to assume.
This process should be announced from the beginning. We are talking about personal data. We must take the risks or not.
An ICO investor knows from the beginning if he has to give his ID or passport, we don't, we find out at the end. It's not fair. The rest of the arguments such as preventing multi-accounts seem out of place because the problem is not that. The projects announce this in the end on purpose because they know that if they announce it at the beginning less people will participate.
I think we are being very conformist with this. Giving personal information is a risk that not everyone wants to assume.
Sharing a good idea with people) Create ICO took a lot of people to participate bounty with newbies) After that KYC and with all this documentation in online banks to take credits) If it will be done fast by script can give great profit)
i support bounties which ask kyc. at least no scammers able to join the campaign.
i joined gbx bounty, it wants kyc to join bounty. the projects gain huge success, and less bounty participants.
i joined gbx bounty, it wants kyc to join bounty. the projects gain huge success, and less bounty participants.
Although its a hassle and a bit risky for us bounty hunters, we cannot do anything unless you decide not to participate anymore. Some of the bounties and airdrops nowadays are asking for KYC and its alarming though some of it are legit.
pay attention to the transfer KYC of your data at ico or bounty, because you can lose your money. and do not transfer your private key from the purse broadcast! can have bad consequences
Bounty programs are asking bounty hunters to do KYC before they are paid for work done . What do you think of this development.
Actually I do not agree if the bounty program asks KYC unless it is for investors because our identity security is maintained by dev (albeit it is odd) and to return funds for those living in countries where ICOs are banned.
Some of the sites that are collecting KYC documents seems very inefficiently built and the information might get hacked very easily. I cannot understand if they are providing free coins, is it really necessary to complete KYC for that? There is no real investment involved in that case.
In my opinion, it wouldn't be a problem if the KYC would be made explicitly announced at the start of the ICO campaign. Some people may prefer to send an identity card or passport. However, it isn't a good idea to bring a KYC condition at the end of a job if it is worked for a long time without prior notice. Those who want to work for the ICO campaign should be able to choose initially this. Unfortunately there is a lot of fraud that can be done using your credentials.
This is very disturbing. The full idea of cryptocurrencies is - as the name says - to be "cryptic", that is "hidden", "mysterious".
And it's only an excuse that they want to protect us from scammers: it's the same with "anti terrorism" laws.
With the pretext to "protect us", they want to control us. You can bet that terrorist and scammers laugh seeing these "security measures".
And it's only an excuse that they want to protect us from scammers: it's the same with "anti terrorism" laws.
With the pretext to "protect us", they want to control us. You can bet that terrorist and scammers laugh seeing these "security measures".
KYC's in bounty campaigns and in ICO's are a good thing in order to stop scammers and users with multiple accounts. But it also run the risk of identity theft to the participants (both ICO and the bounty). Just make sure that the bounty you're joining has a legitimate and trustworthy team and advisors.
Jump to: