Topic: What makes a crypto project reliable and trustworthy ? - page 8. (Read 1292 times)

                                                                                                   
Yess. i think those are the important factors that create investment confidence whether short-term or long-term.  I think that's one more thing about the product - it has to have a structure that can grow, change, optimize continuously, the free market decides the use of the product, no one will use the platform of the product.  product, protocol that nothing attractive, good for them.  In my opinion, ETNY is a viable project in terms of reliability, it is very new but it is not an investment incentive

Tera Luna has failed due to mismanagement so we can't say that their developers are reliable. Nowadays, only well-established projects are reliable. Coins that have gone through different market situations and deal with all types of seasons.
I must say that top coins are better to trust. They have good developers and their innovation is continuous. Coins with a good foundation are better to rely on. Those with a concrete plan and strong foundation could stand firm and will always gain the trust of their users.

Not all because I can see that some projects are run by good developers and a strong team like Tera Luna but in the long run, it turns scam.
The only thing I can see that I project is trustworthy is when it possesses a long-term plan as in this way they already have the things to do. Because a project will survive if they have a concrete plan and if they look for the welfare of everyone, not just for the company itself.
It was very unfortunate that most of the new projects today have been governed by greed, which is why they will never stay long in the market but collapse.

To be fair, we do not know everyone in the crypto world, which means that the team could be people who are amazing at what they do or could be people who have no idea about it and we would still not have any clue why and how it would do good.

This is mainly because if someone tells you "X person is leading the team", if you do not know that X person, then you have no idea if the team is any good or not, you could look at their linkedin and hope that it says something, but it rarely does because even if you worked at the best places, you could be a moron as well, I have seen plenty of moron Google workers too, doesn't mean they will be smart, there is a reason why they no longer work there.

King of cryptocurrency? Where does that come from?
You mean Bitcoin is the "King" and whenever there's a king, there's also a queen so who is the queen of cryptocurrency? Funny logic of yours saying Bitcoin is like a "King". Bitcoin is Bitcoin that's all. No king or prince or whatever you want to call to it. Bitcoin is just at the top cryptocurrency in terms of market cap that's all.

The team? Community? The use-case of it?
We've seen it all. We've seen a team of a particular project that is very, very good, but their project ended up either as a scam project or a dead project. We've seen a project with a huge community that ended up as a dead project. We've also seen new projects that has a good use-case and very helpful to the people, but ended up as a scam.

In short, there are no trustworthy and reliable projects right now especially in altcoins. I want to say those top market cap coins are more trustworthy, but even those altcoins are ending up as a scam. FTX, Luna, Bitconnect in the past, Centra and many more that are now gone because they are a scam projects. Right now, it's Bitcoin that I can consider as a trustworthy and reliable, but altcoins? Even those at the top aren't trustworthy and reliable to me. It's kind of ironic that I'm saying it where in fact, I'm also holding some altcoins.

Nothing beats out Bitcoin into its place and its understandable on why its been sitting on the top of the chain.Speaking about top altcoins then you could consider them to be trustworthy and credible.

They wont be sitting behind or below bitcoin for no reason.You might be having some bad results into altcoins but pretty sure that you are might be able to deal with those hyped and shilled out ones
or really touching up those low caps? Am i right?.

What makes me that confident on investing on altcoins projects is that i do see their real use case or utility plus having those updates and following up their roadmaps.

As of today, only a few altcoins are considered to be reliable and trustworthy.  The factor that makes a project reliable and trustworthy is its decentralization and at the same time the time, it had proven that it won't scam its holders.  The integrity of the team is also one huge factor but when a new project is created the project developer needs to prove how reliable and trustworthy their project is.

the team itself I guess, you could always check history of the team and decide, also their tokenomics also just as important because it could decides whether this project has potential or not because honestly coins with shitty tokenomics will always doomed to fail, no one gonna invest knowing the tokenomics engineered to be fruitful for the team and leaves no room for investments and that will be holding its value from growing.
but I'd say finding out the team behind the project is always essential.

Trick question, pretty much none of them are once ypu break them all down.  Once something gets too big there is a sense of scam in the air.  Greed makes people do wierd things.  What I mean is that projects can start with good intentions, but if they are really that good and become big the money will alter the project inherently. 

Probably have some criteria to consider if the altcoin is trustworthy or not. But, the problem is even if the altcoins meet the criteria, it doesn't guarantee that they re really trustworthy. Because sometimes, there will be any FUD about them and it will cause them to crash easily in a very short time. I ever trusted top coins, but what happened to Luna and FTX especially really broke the trust and consider that altcoins always give high risks whatever the coin. Even if it is BNB or Ethereum, they also still have a higher risk than Bitcoin. That is why, if choosing altcoin for investment, I will not be using it for a long-term period because of the high risk. This will be for the short term with certain conditions that I must always consider.

I see the other members have mentioned many factors. I want to add an important point I used to follow before I decide whether I will invest in a project or not, which is the development activity. This important factor can show if the developers are serious about developing what they intend to achieve, or just want to ride the hype wave to sell their coin to the crowd. Now, as we are in a bear market, this factor can really determine the seriousness of a project.

There are many factors such as the project team, the project concept, partners, support and the plans they proposed to the public. From all of these factors, I weigh project partners the heaviest. Those partners are not easy to get especially those big ones who are already established and has a reputation to offer. Those partners surely did their homework researching about the team background and project future projection before they join as partners. So most of the time all you need to do is to do a basic research about the project. Though not all of it is running successful even those high caliber partnership tend to fail. It will make it easy for you to filter out those shtty project than those who has potential that's why I value team with high caliber partnerships.

Not all projects with a great team can continue. I already saw a couple of it who fail but I am not saying that we shouldn't follow this method anymore. This was still better than not doing a research at all and even those legit projects fail in the future, at least we already earn a decent income with them from the start and on the middle of their run.

A collapsing project can still be safely abandoned as long as one is vigilant with his investments. This is something that is not possible if you invest in a scam project because before you make a move, they are already gone. That's because they ensure that they are the ones who can only earn.

Support I guess. The extent of how a project  address problems is what would make it trustworthy. Loopholes and flaws of a project is clearly normal. There will always be a room for improvement IF the project itself would initiate to do so. But if a project would choose image over existing issues, that would be the time, for me, to doubt their progress on a long run. Many projects could offer huge rewards and other promises but if it would not compensate overall progress of the platform or project in the making, then that would be a bad thing which could push away the interest of meticulous investors in this industry.

Always research the team behind it first. That's the best you could do to check whether they will continue their project or not. Someone who has a reputation for whatever service they are providing.
An example would be Gala Games which has the head of EA Sports gaming development.
They are focusing on games so it would be best to have someone like him in their midst. Connect the dots. It's not like a gaming developer would be in a project in an exchange service or other non-related to it.
I think that's one of the most important parts of examining the legitimacy of a certain project. The rest will follow. I've already experienced a lot of rug pulls on the NFT days, and that's because of not checking that side of the project. Joined the hype and it's a failure.

There are many things to look at, do they have a unique utility, is the platform not a copy from other platforms including the whitepaper, do they have a real team with real skill and capability, are they willing to do AMA, it's not enough that they have a compelling description of their project, scammers are good in creating hype on their project.
The real project does not hype its project, they want steady growth and they want a stable and strong community that is willing to support them until they launch its platform.

It plays to the point that the developers are trustworthy and it's just all about them first and then the project that they're working with. If those deliverables and proposals are achievable and factual.
And going to the project, one of the most important thing with it is about the use case. If no use case then that only means that the developers aren't serious with what they're working with because that's what a project's token should be. There has to be a use on it.

I hope we could be a part of the making of the project and let us speak or assess their projects before launching so we can assure that it can be trusted. But unfortunately, it was not like that, they have their own agenda and the credibility of the said projects certainly lies in the hands of the developers. We wanted to change how it works but that seems impossible. It is just to say that the only thing we can do for now in order to avoid investing in scam projects is to stay away from hyped projects and those who have no working products.

I almost want to say nothing even when the project itself is developed by developers who are said to be trusted they can still end badly, why because altcoins are always centralized where developers have a large portion of ownership and this is one of the opportunities for them to run away from the project after selling all the coins it has, so it's hard to be able to trust which altcoins can be trusted because the online world is a difficult place to find people who can be trusted.

You can follow 3 rules formulated by SEC Chair Gary Gensler to define scam:
"(1) the crypto project can’t provide clear documentation regarding how it works or how it plans to delivers on its goals; (2) the project can’t demonstrate that it's in regulatory compliance; and (3) the project can’t easily explain what it is at all" - https://sports.yahoo.com/sec-chair-gary-gensler-says-224932712.html