As soon you ask People for money on your Idea/Project/Company and give them a Share/Coin/promises you are making the same as a IPO.
But it looks like we play blind
Topic: Should ICOs be regulated - page 28. (Read 24188 times)
Somehow it´s a Joke why they aren´t already regulated.
As soon you ask People for money on your Idea/Project/Company and give them a Share/Coin/promises you are making the same as a IPO.
But it looks like we play blind
As soon you ask People for money on your Idea/Project/Company and give them a Share/Coin/promises you are making the same as a IPO.
But it looks like we play blind
This regulation is unpredictable thing. You know,in some cases it is positive point, because community need changes in ICO industry and investors no more suffer from dishonest ICO market.
To my mind it should be improved in a new way, like DAICO
To my mind it should be improved in a new way, like DAICO
I think that it is necessary to reflect on the functional. What will the regulation give us? I think that exactly the regulation today will be able to show where there is a scam project and where not. That is, scam projects in general should not be in a regulated market at all.
I strongly believe and recommend that ico should be regulated.because only through ico that new fund come into market and if proove to be scam again and again then it become difficult for crypto to grow. Regulated market increase the confidence of investor
You did not think that when the market of ICO projects is regulated, there will probably be a lot of new rules and innovations, and it can be assumed that regulators will not have a positive attitude towards holding bounty campaigns, and projects will distribute their tokens only to verified investors. There are advantages and disadvantages to market regulation.
I strongly believe and recommend that ico should be regulated.because only through ico that new fund come into market and if proove to be scam again and again then it become difficult for crypto to grow. Regulated market increase the confidence of investor
My answer to this question is yes, ICOs should be regulated, because that will reduce the level of scam in cryptocurrency, and it build the trust of investors.
it's true, but making regulation is very difficult in cryptocurrency and in 2018 there were so many ICO projects that ended scams that made it hard to believe anymore.
My answer to this question is yes, ICOs should be regulated, because that will reduce the level of scam in cryptocurrency, and it build the trust of investors.
Considering the high level of scam associated with ICOs presently, many investors are at risk of loosing their investments. Bounty hunters like us are not spared as we may be rendering free services to some scammers and also risking our personal data.
I suppose a regulatory body be set up to audit the ICO process and the founders, and if anything goes wrong or should the project fail, they will be liable. This will reduce drastically investors risk and also keep scammers away. What do you think?
I suppose a regulatory body be set up to audit the ICO process and the founders, and if anything goes wrong or should the project fail, they will be liable. This will reduce drastically investors risk and also keep scammers away. What do you think?
Lack of regulation gives us bigger salaries if we are talking about bounty campaigns. There should be some balance between regulated safe job and risky business here. Regulation usually decreases potential profit. Less risk - less income.
Right from the onset, there supposed to have been a body that foresees the activities of ICOs.
Although, there might still have been some lapses, but it will be to the barest minimum.
Regulating ICOs is what is most needed, because of the increased number scam projects.
Although, there might still have been some lapses, but it will be to the barest minimum.
Regulating ICOs is what is most needed, because of the increased number scam projects.
We are striving for decentralization, but at the same time we want the regulator to protect us. It causes a little dissonance. 
It seems to me that the core of the regulation system should be the cryptocurrency community and not the state organizations. As a guarantor, there may be services that will unite communities, and there may be many of them, but all together they make up the system of regulation.
The guarantor would fulfill the role of the curator of ICOs, and only if problems arise would the case be transferred to the state structures.
Of course, the description is not very complete,
I know that there will be many questions for implementation, but I think the basis of the idea is more or less clear.
It seems to me that the core of the regulation system should be the cryptocurrency community and not the state organizations. As a guarantor, there may be services that will unite communities, and there may be many of them, but all together they make up the system of regulation.
The guarantor would fulfill the role of the curator of ICOs, and only if problems arise would the case be transferred to the state structures.
Of course, the description is not very complete,
I know that there will be many questions for implementation, but I think the basis of the idea is more or less clear. Considering the high level of scam associated with ICOs presently, many investors are at risk of loosing their investments. Bounty hunters like us are not spared as we may be rendering free services to some scammers and also risking our personal data.
I suppose a regulatory body be set up to audit the ICO process and the founders, and if anything goes wrong or should the project fail, they will be liable. This will reduce drastically investors risk and also keep scammers away. What do you think?
I suppose a regulatory body be set up to audit the ICO process and the founders, and if anything goes wrong or should the project fail, they will be liable. This will reduce drastically investors risk and also keep scammers away. What do you think?
I thought rating sites can help us figure out how to spot a scam but even them they can't do it, so we need a regulation that will approve these coming ICO I don't how is it going to be possible, but we really need to set up one for investors to regain their confidence investing in ICO.
I think a regulator for ICO is necessary. ICO regulation is the only thing that can overcome such a large number of fraud.
Of course , not always the regulation is good , but for the ico I think the adjustment will only go to the best, because the project team will be in sight and in case of what will be responsible for it !
The increasing number of ICO frauds is very disturbing and unfair for us bounty hunters who risk our time and money for useless projects but we only benefit one party without getting results. I can't do anything but avoid it.
I think a regulator for ICO is necessary. ICO regulation is the only thing that can overcome such a large number of fraud.
It seems to me that rich people who take part in the stock market and those people who today represent the interests of banks want to understand that cryptocurrency is safe, for this we need regulation.
Regulation should attract a lot more large investors than we have in the market now. Everyone is afraid of instability and unpredictability of the market, but even more everyone is afraid of manipulation and fraud in the market, this is what we have to get rid of.
Because of regulation more people gain lots of confidence to participate with the project goals, according with promising road map stated on the project white paper. Market fraud is the threat of the project, it cannot provide any benefits for the ICO. Some of those investors will just use their money for laundering and other illegal money used for devious activities particular on deepweb.
There should be an organization formed to audit new and ongoing ICOs. They check and if there are things that are not in accordance with the regulations they can give a warning. And this will greatly help bounty hunters and investors.
Yeah i think the number of scam project out there has really increased and it seems everybody is using the digital platform to dupe others to make their wealth. something has to be done about it and SEC should be up to their task.
Yes, ICO should be regulated because there are many scams happen through ICO's and people lose their money. If this market goes regulated then it is not easy for anyone to scam people.
Ico is really very dangerous for investors. I'm not sure, but I think that soon the ICO will cease to exist. However, cryptocurrency regulation is necessary in full, not just for ICO.
I think that ICO regulation is a good idea to avoid creating fraudulent projects.
The only question that remains is who will play the role of this regulator? I have no idea about this.
And is it possible that the regulator will have too much influence on the cryptocurrency market?
The only question that remains is who will play the role of this regulator? I have no idea about this.
And is it possible that the regulator will have too much influence on the cryptocurrency market?
We are regulators for ourselves. We need to study the project well in order not to get caught by scammers. ICO regulation has its disadvantages. But maybe in time it will be possible.
yes, investor is a regulator for theirself when they want investing in ico campaign means he was ready to take the risk, but we still need regulator for ico campaign Jump to: