But, what is the standard for a "good" coin/project?
Is bitcoin the standard?
Here is another way of looking at it, don't we all have the say as to what is junk or not?
Isn't that the whole philosophy behind blockchain technology? That it is open source, decentralized, and we all participate in it?
So even if something is ponzi-like, if the vast majority of people are buying it, and trading it, supporting it, doesn't that give it some kind of legitimacy?
Well, it's kind of nihilistic view on things that just means that we are using it for money and gain and that's it.
But that's the way it is going now.
Of course, I will stay away from projects that I don't think will benefit me or others, but for those that are in it and investing in it, well, more power to them.
And if they lose all their money, well, it's all on them.
You of course have a fair point.
However what about if projects are proven to be run and controlled by proven liars, cheats, scammers?
The fact some may or may not have usable tech is not sufficient to reverse the fact the main benefactors of these projects are the proven liars cheats and scammers.
It is different if it is not proven. That is just an opinion. However if it is proven and is an observable event then there is no room for opinion on if it happened or not the only judgement call is if you want to invest and risk your investment on people that are proven liars cheats and scammers.
Of course many have not useful tech and are utter dirt anyway regardless of the fact they are operated by scammers.