Topic: What makes a crypto project reliable and trustworthy ? - page 7. (Read 1292 times)

If team behind it had a successful project, then why are they doing another one? I can tell you one reason, it wasn't the whole team. Like for example CTO of a great project leaves and builds a new thing, that doesn't mean the new thing will be good, maybe it was the CEO that made the previous one good, maybe it was CMO, maybe CFO? Maybe CTO wasn't that important at all and others saved him? We wouldn't know until we see the results.

This is why there is no way we can say a brand new project is reliable and trustworthy, all of them are unreliable and shouldn't be trusted until they proven otherwise. This is our money we are talking about, we can't go with "trustworthy until proven otherwise", because that would cause us losses.

I think you are referring to a new projects or new altcoins, you will know if that altcoins is trust worthy when the team behind it has already a past successful project, trust is really important if the altcoins listed on a big exchange like binance and kucoin etc., Then that altcoins is trust worthy, there are a lot of rug pull projects specially during a bear season most of the project will not succeed if it is held during bear season because only few investors invest during that time and it is very hard to collect funds from ICO so it end up to failure so i prefer investing or buying old coin that has a good trust record for good.

If we observe then we will see that there are different types of projects. From them we have to choose the right one. And if we can choose the right project then we don't have to face loss. So we have to do right thing all the time otherwise we have to go through big problems so I think if we can take right decision at right time then it is for us. will be good

good reputation from the devs and the fact that they always delivers, it doesn't need to be complicated to make project trustworthy.
it's just the good will from the devs in their effort of building their project because we could judge whether the devs actually willing or just try to money grabbing.

Aggressive marketing via bot like accounts on social media is another red flag. Failing to deliver is one thing and failing to develop anything is another. You must try to verify the team's identity on linkedin and social media. Text the advisors as listed and try to engage them into what they feel about the project, you might get a better idea but in many cases they will not respond, in which case you have to assume the worst.

Often advisors have a lock in period after which they will suddenly dump on the open market driving the price to such lows that it cannot recover back - this has often happened with many projects and the sad part is that we honest investors are the ones who must suffer this.

Going through all these points, I am sure most old times will accept that buying bitcoin is way less anxiety inducing and profitable than newly launched altcoin projects.

I am not sure...your point really makes sense but there might be some possibilities that some dev teams hide their identify for appropriate reasons. In general, those who are aggressive in marketing but fail in delivery are extremely suspicous. I would just wait and observe their roadmap and relevant outcome before I give my trust. It's never wrong to be too careful.

Those who seek assurance cab focus on coins that have been running activities for a long time. Those who have a bigger community and have dealt with the ups and downs of the market. I would say that some of the top coins can perform better and will be more reliable. It's hard to rely on new projects nowadays so focusing on old and trusted coins will be wiser.

There is one case in which I would allow for the developers to be anonymous and that is if they are developing privacy coins, over the years governments have tried to break those coins and to impose them way harsher regulations as the privacy they offer is way better than what you can get with bitcoin, and it would not surprise me if the developers of those coins were at some point prosecuted, but other than that any developer which hides their identity is to me a clear sign to stay away from their coin.

When talking about altcoin , there are no concrete idea of how we could find a legit or trustworthy project though we are tend to believe that there are a possible big reutrns.
altcoin is fall of risk and that is not a fact but reality so better to check your project wisely as even those who are being promoted by big people sometimes end up not progressing on the top.
find your risk and invest only what you can afford to lose.

Sorry, I can't help laughing. Yes, it is funny when someone anonymous says Satoshi Nakamoto also hid his real name because comparing themselves with Satoshi sounds like a strong tone of scammers. What is the point of hiding their real names if they are really working on an authentic project ? I think most people wouldn't blame them even if the project failed eventually after endless efforts. The thing of trying to hide something in the beginning is very much suspicious.

But if I saw such famous people as Vitalik Buterin or Gavin Wood among the team members and I had the opportunity to invest in such a project at an early stage, then I wouldn't even read a Whitepaper)) But usually we have to see anonymous team members who justify this by saying that Satoshi Nakamoto also hid his real name.

For now ETH is kinda strong but I am still sceptical about its future so maybe yes, ETH can also end up like that but I have no doubts about BTC. As long the earth is still there then only us can turn into a dust but not a physical thing or currency like BTC which is the most trusted and useful crypto. If in case BTC has the ability like ETH have which is to create a smart contract then I do not think ETH and other altcoins will exist.

BTC would have even become a powerful crypto. I am not sure if a volatile crypto can be called as reliable because of their unstable price but there are trustworthy cryptos whose value can always recover after every dump.

Shared your view. ETH is definitely more than an altcoin. It's becoming an enormously powerful and stable blockchain on which many new innovative technologies can experiment. If ETH collapsed, that would mean half of crypto users lose their faith and their whole value system vanishes. Endless attacks would come from the traditional industries and that'd probably destroy all achievements that the crypto users have built. The Bitcoin is not alone and should not be a King without a Queen or capable Generals.

Will you say that about Ethereum too? Even if we don't trust any other coin, I don't think ETH deserves the lashing others get. I've said somewhere sometime that if Bitcoin had the ability of the smart contract ETH has that has actually developed this industry by allowing many projects to be birthed on its chain, its price would've soared way more than what we've now. For me, ETH isn't just any other coin. It's a major player too like Bitcoin.

Every day there are huge projects that get into th forum, but the problem is only 10 percent of that projects are real and trusted ones. Mostly we should follow the old trader's advice regarding background checks. We should use some time to check the full background check of each owner and worker involved in the project. The real project will be connected with the real profile and real people.

The remaining scam project uses profiles from other social media. They used Facebook, and Twitter to get the profile of foreigners and accused them as the real owners of the project. It should be captured only by the way of finding a fake profile engaged in the project scam. Then you can save your money to get into the scam project and use the money for a trusted project like bitcoin, Ethereum, ADA, and SOL. Always remember that bitcoin is the king of the crypto market.

First, you have to read the whitepaper of the crypto project. Then you can do the fundamental analysis for the project. After that, you will get an idea about the project's long time value. The next point is you have to do the on-chain and off-chain analysis for the project.  Then you will get an idea about all the on-chain volumes and transactions.

1. Do the fundamental Analysis
2. Do the on-chain Analysis
3. Do the off-chain Analysis.

If the above analysis is completed, then you can do the technical analysis as well.

To trust in a project must have solid Fundamentals that's for sure, but when it comes to crypto projects to be trusted is because it has a team, developers and future use cases that's clear. Apart from that, it is also important to see that crypto has many exchanges or is available on many markets. I think like that

Many factors determine the value and reliability of an altcoin project. Starting from quality, team, community, goals, roadmap, functions, development, and many more values to determine whether an altcoin is good or not. You can do your own research on that.

However, when you get all of that, and you find an altcoin that fits your criteria, it's not necessarily a great result. we know that competition from new altcoins is fierce. sometimes new altcoins function worse than existing altcoins. when the altcoin doesn't really appeal to investors, then you can be sure that you might end up with unsatisfactory results. maybe you get a very cheap price for the altcoin price, or the project is abandoned. However, research is carried out continuously, and gradually. so you can know the potential that can happen to the altcoin in the near future. You know, many new projects from altcoins initially gave great trust, but due to some problems, they sometimes leave the project.

If their developers came from a known social media site like Telegram or Meta, that would be their one ticket to be legit, and they surely not gonna scam people with their names on the line. That's why when Telegram announce it will gonna sell its own altcoin, it almost sold out not too long ago but the SEC hunts them before they can even make a move. This is one of the ways to know if altcoins are reliable because some of those altcoins that came from unanimous developers often became shit coins in months and became a pump-and-dump scam.

Well, a promising team, commnuity and utility are not guarantees to the reliability of any crypto project but there is a higher probability to sucess if any project owns these characteristics. You said you are still holding some altcoins now even though you had all these doubts in the beginning. Why ? Because back then, once you made up your mind to invest in altcoins, all things you had to refer to were just the Whitepaper, dev team or some use case that project may apply to. Based on what you saw and believe, you finally made the decision to invest. See my point here ? The whole process was natural and flawless and we can not deny this. Unfortunately most crypto projects failed eventually because somewhere in the process, something went wrong and nobody realized this. My question might need some correction that even a seemingly reliable and trustworthy project does not guarantee any positive outcome eventually.

What you are saying is true but at the same time was not Luna one of the coins in which the community had its trust and it failed dramatically? So in my opinion even if we trust a coin we must never let that trust blind us, if we see anything wrong with it then we need to get out of it as soon as we can as a way to protect ourselves and our capital, because as we have seen with Luna and many other coins before if you get caught when the project fails you will lose everything without any opportunity of ever getting it back.