Topic: VOTE! Do you participate in ICO that requires KYC (your personal data)? - page 2. (Read 1158 times)

And you also don't care about what happens with your information , just to make a couple of hundred dollars if you are lucky. You have no idea who these guys are and what they are gonna do with your info.

If I'm going to join an ICO project that I like as a signatory campaign participant and under the conditions of this campaign I see the possibility of passing a KYC check, I basically do not join such a project. There are a lot of ICO campaigns and I can find myself another suitable project without this illegal verification. And such companies are possible, because of this in the future will not succeed if such as I will be a lot and they will boycott such projects.

The KYC process in my opinion is not very correct from the protection of personal information and personal life, because I believe that scanning of documents can only be performed by accredited agencies or government agencies.

Yes, there was a complete failure with this company. Such a database of phones was merged into the network. After this, start to wonder whether to send documents for KYC or not ...

kyc is for me a no go. first i thought kyc is a good thing, but after thinking about it, i am against it. i can not be sure before that I do not give any scamer my data.

so i vote no. maybe I will miss some ico, but i can live with that.

I dont participate on ICO requires KYC who knows they have your data and sell it. Its ok to give your information on ICO if the company is known and they provide information about them that we requires KYC.

As a participant in the ICO signature campaign, I do not fundamentally join ICO projects, which, under the conditions of accession, provide for or do not exclude the conduct of a KYC audit. Such a requirement for participants in the signature campaign is illegal, because we do not invest any money in the ICO project. If we also consider the verification of investors, then in fact this is not a test, but the collection of personal information regarding investors. The ICO team is not a law enforcement agency with the authority to verify the data provided. They just compare this information to each other and if this information is not something suspicious, it is counted. However, even the law enforcement agencies of a particular country can not simply conduct a check against citizens of other states. Therefore, in the end, this is not a test, but simply the collection of confidential information and such a collection must be discontinued. This is a very bad trend. I think that for the entire period of the conduct of KYC inspections, no one has been identified who would attempt to launder "dirty" money. Therefore, the collection of such information under the guise of verification brings more harm than good. In addition, such an audit is easily circumvented by providing copies of other people's documents.

I can tell you.  For example Fiancia  shares personal data (private phone numbers) of KYC participants right in its own bounty spreadsheet.  

Every good ICO requires to pass KYC for participation. So if you wan't to get a profit you have no choice but to fill the KYC. Of course I wouldn't like to share my personal information for unknown people, but I take all the risks in order to earn some money. Even some bounty campaigns started to require KYC, so it can happen that you've been working for several weeks and then couldn't pass KYC and didn't receive anything. So I don't know how to deal with it.

No. Because I do not like when some project wants my passport data, I do not know how they will use them.

For example, one project recently shared KYC participant's Phone numbers right in the spreadsheet. It was open for all next to their BTT and social profiles.

For me, this practice of obtaining documents is very unpleasant. What then can be done by owning such information. Spam is a trifle, you can remove it.

I do not support this idea. But without it you do not have the right to take part in the project. Therefore, you have to undergo a procedure like everyone else.

I would never participate in the ICO I don't trust in, that is why I usually participae in the ICOs that require KYC. Usually I don't use my national passport whuch I think can somehow protect me from the frauds.

Fore sir, it depends on the power of the project. If that project has a big possibility to gain high amount when launches in some exchanges, im very sure that all investors are no doubt in giving their kyc. They are requiring kyc because they want to know where are investors from. Its okay at all mate.

I participate in ICOs that require KYC, I would even go so far that I wouldn't trust an ICO which doesn't require a KYC :O but yes I am aware of giving away my private information

I think, KYC can alternate from another project like ID verification from 3rd party, so we do not share those private information to any random startup project. but to answer the question i might say yes i still want to fulfill my KYC if this is a good projects that i like.

Yes, because investing in ICO, I hope to make a profit, so I do not care about anonymity in this case

It depends on the project I am not so fixated on needing KYC or not and even if project is good but required KYC then i will participate, because some ICOs are banned in the country then KYC is required, also I have to make sure that the identity I provide is safe in the hands of the developer.

My rate is 50:50 if I feel a bad project I will not provide personal data for them. It's dangerous if my personal data is exposed outside of me, and I'm going to have a lot of trouble.