Topic: KYC should be for big whales - page 3. (Read 25305 times)
KYC for investors is not a bad idea. Though, crooks have a way of beating it. They use others documents to pass it. Another area that security needs to be beef up is the Bounty owners by Bitcointalk and other appropriate authorities.
im agree with this statement, because mostly token or coin, the value or price of it was easily manipulated by several whale, they can control market and some coin or token price out there, so they should be did KYC.
I think projects offer KYC because they want many people to know about their projects. However, many cheater use it to make more requests. So if possible, we need to develop better technology so we can safely verify users about personal information and reduce cheater trying to get rewards they don't deserve.
I can still accept kyc for bounty and airdrop. because they are both participants who want to help the success of ICO too, but they don't spend money. while investors spend a lot of money to help the success of ICO, so ICO does not need to know who issued the money, but must know who is the only participant who will be given a salary.
Yeah, that's pretty logical. Large whales can easily influence the price of tokens, so KYC would be a guarantee for them to hold the coin and not sell ahead of time.
I have seen this process in every ico project! I mean every project asks KYC information to the big investors! So, it is already a common matter! But I assume bounty hunters also need to go under a good KYC procedure to avoid the multiple submissions in a single bounty!
These are sensitive data and should be kept secure otherwise it should not be requested for in the first place. We've had cases of data breach and thousands of documents falling into the wrong hands. This is the main reason people have issues with submitting KYC. KYC shouldn't be a problem because it addresses a number of issues on both sides; for the project and also for investors.
KYC does aim to reduce cheating like multiple accounts on a bounty or airdrop, but many bounty hunters don't agree
with KYC in a bounty, for me it's not a problem filling KYC if the project is potentially good in the future
with KYC in a bounty, for me it's not a problem filling KYC if the project is potentially good in the future
KYC is part of the business when investing. The process should be easy and smooth and should be done by a third
party that our sensitive data being protected.
party that our sensitive data being protected.
I'm here today to drop my own point about how KYC should be use
- KYC requirement for bounties and airdrops is so unreasonable ,KYC implementation is no doubt a good idea but it should be forced only on big investors that wants to buy large amount of a token either From Exchanges
- there should be limit for KYC requirements e.g like if an investor wants to buy 10,000$ worths of tokens upward then he or she must go through KYC ,just saying
- KYC requirement for bounties and airdrops is so unreasonable ,KYC implementation is no doubt a good idea but it should be forced only on big investors that wants to buy large amount of a token either From Exchanges
- there should be limit for KYC requirements e.g like if an investor wants to buy 10,000$ worths of tokens upward then he or she must go through KYC ,just saying
big whales already have to pass kys everywhere. during tokensales and when they trade and withdrawal on solid exchanges.
Exactly, KYC should be for those buying from 5000 USD upward. It shouldn't be for those buying below that and think money below 5000 USD shouldn't be classified as launderable money in any country. Also bounty hunters shouldn't be among those that will be doing bounty before receiving rewards for their labors
If we talk about the fairness of the application of the KYC procedure, it is advisable to apply this to all participants, including the ICO developers. Nevertheless, KYC for bounty hunters does not make sense, since it is quite enough for them to have two-factor identification to avoid manipulation with several accounts.
If we talk about the legality of the KYS procedure, then it should be carried out by absolutely everyone, including the ISO developers. But all the same, it is incomprehensible for bounty hunters, since it would be enough for them to have two-factor identification in order to avoid fraud with several accounts.
Two factor authentication is still not a good idea because people can use multiple accounts from different devices so KYC is mandatory when they want to restrict multiple accounts but why they don't mention at the time of joining on bounties if their intention is that. 
I'm here today to drop my own point about how KYC should be use
- KYC requirement for bounties and airdrops is so unreasonable ,KYC implementation is no doubt a good idea but it should be forced only on big investors that wants to buy large amount of a token either From Exchanges
- there should be limit for KYC requirements e.g like if an investor wants to buy 10,000$ worths of tokens upward then he or she must go through KYC ,just saying
- KYC requirement for bounties and airdrops is so unreasonable ,KYC implementation is no doubt a good idea but it should be forced only on big investors that wants to buy large amount of a token either From Exchanges
- there should be limit for KYC requirements e.g like if an investor wants to buy 10,000$ worths of tokens upward then he or she must go through KYC ,just saying
It is still understandable if KYC required for hunters because usually hunters can get quite much token too.
But it won't be acceptable if you must submit KYC documents just for participating in airdrops.
we just need to avoid airdrops that requiring KYC for its participants.
This is honest. But this simply will never happen, because all these people, who today have very great wealth, spend a lot of money in order to simply never know them. It seems to me a very well-known fact.
Kyc aims to reduce multiple accounts, for some bounty and airdrop participants. so I think that is quite reasonable, especially for the bounty who finally obliged the cyc at the end of the ico period.
Some projects have to follow the laws and regulations of their countries so KYC can be needed even for small investors. That is why so ICOs exclude US and some other countries to minimize their regulatory risks.
And remember there was a lot of them have stealing investors identity. KYC should be implemented for both investors and developers to avoid scammers and being compliant with all of regulation. that should be the main answer to the question.
ideally, it should be required for large scale investors, however, the rate at which people cheat with multiple accounts in bounty and airdrop programs calls for KYC. For airdrops, it is not worth going through KYC because of the reward at stake.
KYC is used by developers to avoid cheating in bounty and airdrop programs. Because there are so many cases of multiple accounts taking part in the program. And KYC is one way to reduce fraud. As for large investors, it seems that they have been announced when they will take part in the ICO, so investors with large nominal purchases are required to participate in KYC which aims to avoid money laundering in the process of purchasing tokens during ICO.
I think that KYC should be done for every participant and it does not matter if it is an ICO investor or a bounty hunter. KYC is made to protect honest participants and I have absolutely no problems by passing any KYC.
Jump to: