Thank you to those who responded.
Would you agree or disagree that a product being finished prior to fundraising is more ethical than fundraising for a project that is merely a whitepaper and an idea?
Do you think the timeline of a project is a strong or weak ethical indication?
Topic: What Are The Indications of ICO Ethics? (Read 139 times)
These are my 7 criteria for choosing an ICO project:
1. Uniqueness, the need for an idea
A project in which there is no "chip", a characteristic feature, "will not take off." A new development must necessarily be better than existing ones at least in some way.
2. A clear goal
Businessmen try to attract as much money as possible - it is not known what goals will be set in the future. This approach, when developers do not have a finished product (in the case of ICO, it usually happens this way), is incorrect. Goals must be approved before crowdsale begins and does not change after its completion.
3. Scalability
Let's assume that the development has become successful. It's time to scale the idea: to develop it in new markets and increase the number of participants. Will the developers cope with this?
4. Transparency, the correctness of the budget
You, as an investor, need to check the following: The costs of developing, improving the product - they must necessarily be at least 30% of the collected funds. The cost of marketing - without them, too, do not, but the cost should be within 20-25%. Mandatory costs for legal support (5-10%). There should not be incomprehensible investor articles of expenditure. If all items are met, then the budget can be called transparent and correct.
5. Concept, product
The concept of the ideologists of a new product should be mandatory. Developers attracting investments to ICO, are required to explain in detail how the product will work, thereby generating profits, how successfully to compete with existing ideas. The concept should be "licked" and described in such a way that everything could be understood even by an uninitiated person.
6. Team
First - information about the key members of the team must be in White Paper. Full name and photos are not enough: each expert needs a portfolio (education, successful projects, work experience). A good way is to publish information about the assistants involved. The team should be not only qualified, but also sociable. At least one member of the team is obliged to answer on a regular basis in social networks to the participants of the project. Leaving the discussion is unacceptable: this means that the developers are not ready to justify the benefits of their development.
7. Distribution of tokens
It is important to study how many coins the team will have. Its members must have 20-40% of all issued tokens, and the term of their holding (freezing) is at least 1-1.5 years.
1. Uniqueness, the need for an idea
A project in which there is no "chip", a characteristic feature, "will not take off." A new development must necessarily be better than existing ones at least in some way.
2. A clear goal
Businessmen try to attract as much money as possible - it is not known what goals will be set in the future. This approach, when developers do not have a finished product (in the case of ICO, it usually happens this way), is incorrect. Goals must be approved before crowdsale begins and does not change after its completion.
3. Scalability
Let's assume that the development has become successful. It's time to scale the idea: to develop it in new markets and increase the number of participants. Will the developers cope with this?
4. Transparency, the correctness of the budget
You, as an investor, need to check the following: The costs of developing, improving the product - they must necessarily be at least 30% of the collected funds. The cost of marketing - without them, too, do not, but the cost should be within 20-25%. Mandatory costs for legal support (5-10%). There should not be incomprehensible investor articles of expenditure. If all items are met, then the budget can be called transparent and correct.
5. Concept, product
The concept of the ideologists of a new product should be mandatory. Developers attracting investments to ICO, are required to explain in detail how the product will work, thereby generating profits, how successfully to compete with existing ideas. The concept should be "licked" and described in such a way that everything could be understood even by an uninitiated person.
6. Team
First - information about the key members of the team must be in White Paper. Full name and photos are not enough: each expert needs a portfolio (education, successful projects, work experience). A good way is to publish information about the assistants involved. The team should be not only qualified, but also sociable. At least one member of the team is obliged to answer on a regular basis in social networks to the participants of the project. Leaving the discussion is unacceptable: this means that the developers are not ready to justify the benefits of their development.
7. Distribution of tokens
It is important to study how many coins the team will have. Its members must have 20-40% of all issued tokens, and the term of their holding (freezing) is at least 1-1.5 years.
I honestly think it's a mix of all of those things. Team, idea, whitepaper, team especially, github, social media presence, website, etc.
For me it takes time and a lot of effort. Just wrapped up whitelisting for Gibraltar Blockchain Exchange (GBX) ICO after researching for a solid 2 weeks about them. Token sales platform and crypto exchange. Joining the telegram group of a project is also a great gauge of how in demand they are too. https://t.me/GBXCommunity
For me it takes time and a lot of effort. Just wrapped up whitelisting for Gibraltar Blockchain Exchange (GBX) ICO after researching for a solid 2 weeks about them. Token sales platform and crypto exchange. Joining the telegram group of a project is also a great gauge of how in demand they are too. https://t.me/GBXCommunity
What do you consider an indication of ethics when researching an ICO?
Do you value compliance with government regulations, or look at other factors?
Which parts of the world produce the best coins? The worst?
Potential coinwhales, or coinwhale limiting business practices?
Names of investors behind it?
Transparency? Github?
Licenses?
Asset-backed tokens versus service-backed tokens?
Patented designs? Pending patents?
Any other factors not included on this list?
Perhaps you have a very special analysis you do yourself?
Thanks in advance to any reader on here who takes the time to even respond to just one of these questions.
Do you value compliance with government regulations, or look at other factors?
Which parts of the world produce the best coins? The worst?
Potential coinwhales, or coinwhale limiting business practices?
Names of investors behind it?
Transparency? Github?
Licenses?
Asset-backed tokens versus service-backed tokens?
Patented designs? Pending patents?
Any other factors not included on this list?
Perhaps you have a very special analysis you do yourself?
Thanks in advance to any reader on here who takes the time to even respond to just one of these questions.
Jump to: