Topic: Shit Dev not shit coin (Read 618 times)
I think there are a lot of scam projects because of very greedy developers, they just want to get a lot of profit but don't want to provide good developments for investors so that the projects fail in the middle of the road.
A lot of alarm has been raised on shit coins which have become a concern to many in the crypto sphere, but i feel our attention should be on the shit developer rather talk about the shit coins. The reason why we have shit coins all over is because the number of shit developers has increased to the maximum, i guess it is time to begin to publish the names of shit developers on the forum in order to do some justice to the crypto sphere.
I don't think we should do that because some of the projects I know are where the CEO/COO just hire devs to create or work on the project. If they were shit devs then I don't think there wouldn't be investors at all because it will be seen as obvious scam from the start. And some shitcoins was a result of either a failed project or an exit scam.
The problem lies on the developer because several of them do this kind of work to earn money and accept more work to earn more money. I agree CEO/COO hires their developers but they must make sure that the developers their hired is solely focus on their project since these developers have a huge cut on the token and collected funds. But if a project become shitty, both CEO and the team are to be blame because they did not do their task well.
These concepts are interrelated. If dev cannot provide normal development of the coin, such coin to will turn into shit. After all, they should try to provide for its normal value of the coin and development.
That sounds reasonable. With this internet era, publicity is the best policy for cleaning the space. Social networks will help a lot.
I don't necessarily blame the devs. Some actually tried to do their best to keep their projects alive but the space was full of get rich quick millennial so they had no patience to wait for projects to mature. Actually, what I have observed in crypto is that investors do kill projects at a faster rate more than the devs/owners.
You cannot blame the investors for them, they will always do the pressure game because they want to have their ROI at the earliest possible time. Devs should not work by their emotion but by their mind, they are expected to be qualified enough to develop the project and that includes accepting the pressure, therefore they need to make a good plan for the project to survive even in tough times, if some investors will leave, new ones might come if they see that the team are capable and the project has potential to grow, remember that IEO and ICO are mostly start up projects, so it will take time to see its real value.
that's an interesting way to look at it. I mean I wouldn't say all devs are terrible. Some just like to build things to build. I feel like some projects have just been one offs to test something
I don't necessarily blame the devs. Some actually tried to do their best to keep their projects alive but the space was full of get rich quick millennial so they had no patience to wait for projects to mature. Actually, what I have observed in crypto is that investors do kill projects at a faster rate more than the devs/owners.
A lot of alarm has been raised on shit coins which have become a concern to many in the crypto sphere, but i feel our attention should be on the shit developer rather talk about the shit coins. The reason why we have shit coins all over is because the number of shit developers has increased to the maximum, i guess it is time to begin to publish the names of shit developers on the forum in order to do some justice to the crypto sphere.
I don't think we should do that because some of the projects I know are where the CEO/COO just hire devs to create or work on the project. If they were shit devs then I don't think there wouldn't be investors at all because it will be seen as obvious scam from the start. And some shitcoins was a result of either a failed project or an exit scam.
I also agree with you, the shit dev and also the shit team must be made history books, so that we are not fooled twice
no matter which social media is still active or the account that has a linkedin is sometimes still a scam, an example of a project recently rumored to be a scam is miracle tele, I didn't follow the bounty but I had heard and updated the news, and it was really sad,
no matter which social media is still active or the account that has a linkedin is sometimes still a scam, an example of a project recently rumored to be a scam is miracle tele, I didn't follow the bounty but I had heard and updated the news, and it was really sad,
A lot of alarm has been raised on shit coins which have become a concern to many in the crypto sphere, but i feel our attention should be on the shit developer rather talk about the shit coins. The reason why we have shit coins all over is because the number of shit developers has increased to the maximum, i guess it is time to begin to publish the names of shit developers on the forum in order to do some justice to the crypto sphere.
Agree, coins can be made by anyone but bad intentions from the developer team that makes a coin into shitcoin. Without making a project that can produce a product, they can fool many people with large amounts of money and they should be jailed
A lot of alarm has been raised on shit coins which have become a concern to many in the crypto sphere, but i feel our attention should be on the shit developer rather talk about the shit coins. The reason why we have shit coins all over is because the number of shit developers has increased to the maximum, i guess it is time to begin to publish the names of shit developers on the forum in order to do some justice to the crypto sphere.
I think if you want to publish the name of the developers, it is a bit too late because I believe they were already leaving the crypto sphere and now they are enjoying the money they have got from the investor.It is difficult to track them because we don't know where they live.
They could give a false address on the website, and I am sure that it will be easy to do.
We don't know who they are, although they give their name on the website, and with some pictures of each team, we still don't know if they are true or not.
But there is not too late in publishing which they are, and I think that will help members here to identify them.
They don't serious with the project because of their reason to join in the cryptocurrency is because of the trend of making money from cryptocurrency itself.
The incubator hub treatment is the main critical point of why new projects appear without the real working product. The developers go to make a clone of the old projects in order to collect more funds in the token sales. The IEO model saves the majority of the traders, investors should appreciate the job of the exchanges which eliminate the useless projects from this opportunity. Inexperienced developers just sit on the desk and they wait for the deadline of the duties. If there is no passion thinking about the fate of the project looks like a big nightmare for me. If the team hires the developers without explaining the perception of the project's roadmap, the developers will never care about the investors and project from my experience. Without a solid vision, the ambiguity will stay there for a long time.
We know that's the essence because coin will not be created without a dev, so it should be the dev that will be blame in case the coin failed.
However, when it's already in trading exchanges, it will be traded by the name of the coin, not a name of the developers, so people call it based on its name which is easy to remember.
I hope you understand that, you can't call it dev coin, but call it by the name of the coin which could be a good coin or a shitty coin.
However, when it's already in trading exchanges, it will be traded by the name of the coin, not a name of the developers, so people call it based on its name which is easy to remember.
I hope you understand that, you can't call it dev coin, but call it by the name of the coin which could be a good coin or a shitty coin.
shit developers have gotten more and more profit from each coin they make and then leave it. shit developer plays on ICO, which makes ICO less desirable. I once invested in coins that looked good and could be profitable, but the developer cheated all investors by not listing coins on the exchange and then just leaving them.
The developer created shitcoins at the first place, they worked to be a shitdeveloper because of not being competitve. If the project dies you have to look for other projects that can give a chance for you to earn. Shit projects doesn’t deserve your precious time.
I don't think such a conclusion can be drawn. The market is not conducive, so many unexpected things happen, for example, tokens or coins whose prices are difficult to rise. It could be that the development team is people who are experienced or at least competent in their fields, but tokens or coins join in the market at a time that is less profitable then it becomes less valuable.
but they are the same thing. a shit developer creates a shitcoin.
and the problem is not either of them in my opinion. the problem is the community investing in these shitty projects. if you and i don't buy into the ICO scams, garbage altcoins, fork coins, bitcoin copies, centralized altcions,... then these shitcoins die in their first day instead of staying around for years filling the market with garbage.
and the problem is not either of them in my opinion. the problem is the community investing in these shitty projects. if you and i don't buy into the ICO scams, garbage altcoins, fork coins, bitcoin copies, centralized altcions,... then these shitcoins die in their first day instead of staying around for years filling the market with garbage.
noobs and naive users will always buy those shitty coins or maybe even old timers so they can get fast cash.
a lot are not considering the devs' intentions as long as they can get profit in short term basis. and that's a fact!
And why those crap projects are in continuous proliferation because they can always get their audience.
A coin answers the name of the developers or team or in a more better way, a coin is synonymous to its creators (developers); so if a coin is a shit coin it means the team is inexperienced and lacks knowledge. However, from a little research it has been shown that most of these developers goes as far as stealing people's details which they use, thereby calling them out won't have a huge effect as they will also create another to scam investors and users. I think the best way to stay safe in crypto investing is by following every project closely, read their whitepaper and ask provocative questions just to stir up their reactions, in most cases they will either ignore or ban the user or investor thus giving the investor the right answer he needs.
The telegram is full of crypto groups that follow new projects and take them apart right up to the cog. Here's a good example: the crooks behind the Crypterium project have now created the GramEx exchange. As for me, in mobile messengers more convenient to follow such news than to go to the forum.
It's the same people jumping from one project to another. It's normal in this space because they don't have to face any consequences when their project fails. People should learn to check new projects and teams and weed out dev teams made of scammers.
Only the market and the community can verify an altcoin now. You can't expect the police or the SEC to do it for you.
Most of the time these shitcoins are published by anonymous developers even if they are showing themselves in the forum they just hide behind their username. Calling them out and make a hall of shame for all these developers is simply a waste of time considering that they could make another account with different name. Well if the developers happen to reveal themselves in their project's website that's worth a try I guess.
Jump to: