Topic: Which do you prefer anonymous developer/creator or well revealed person? (Read 665 times)
September 06, 2018, 03:00:06 AM
i personally would prefer well reputable person with good portfolio lead the project. not some shady keyboard warrior. even when we invest on any company we need to know who is owner of the business and it physical operations.
September 06, 2018, 02:17:15 AM
It a world full of speculations, we will always prefer transparency. We will always want to know the team or the person behind a project so that we can avoid being scam. Knowing them and their background is a huge trust factor. However, there are instances where developers tend to stay anon, especially in terms of security purposes.
Exactly! Now that people have been a victim of several scams in the ICO space, I really do not expect anyone to fall for an anonymous developer. As far as team is concerned in any project, it is always very interesting to know where you are putting your investments. This is the thing a lot of investors are mostly particular about in this day and age when scams are increasing by the day, is to investigate the team properly so you can know where you are placing your funds.
September 04, 2018, 08:56:09 AM
Lots of ICO are conducting KYC why to know the identity of the investors. But lets reverse it this way on 2 biggest Crypto Bitcoin and Etherium. Bitcoin founder is Satoshi Nakamoto while Ethereum is Vitalik Buterin between these 2, Etherium's creator revealed himself in public and roaming around the globe to raise awareness of his project to community while bitcoins`s founder still remain anonymously but his project dominate`s the market. Wow very hard to choose right?
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
Bitcoin is a special cryptocurrency, Bitcoin is 100% trustworthy to all investors so knowing the identity of the founder is not important. But for all the altcoin now I want to know who made it and stand behind it. Because there are so many ICO scam and altcoin scam, I would like to know and only invest in those altcoin or ico that have a clean founder. Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
September 04, 2018, 08:29:09 AM
Well, at the present day and age, an anonymous developer would not have been able to go far in any case and I guess we will just have to leave that title only to satoshi nakomoto who still remains anonymous till date.
Considering the level of scam in the space, a lot of investors want to know what and who they are investing their money on. Bitcoin on the other hand started as the foundation and over the years has been able to gain support and reputation, and any developer trying to come on an anonymous ground at this point in time, will only be wasting his or her time.
Considering the level of scam in the space, a lot of investors want to know what and who they are investing their money on. Bitcoin on the other hand started as the foundation and over the years has been able to gain support and reputation, and any developer trying to come on an anonymous ground at this point in time, will only be wasting his or her time.
September 03, 2018, 07:52:35 AM
Lots of ICO are conducting KYC why to know the identity of the investors. But lets reverse it this way on 2 biggest Crypto Bitcoin and Etherium. Bitcoin founder is Satoshi Nakamoto while Ethereum is Vitalik Buterin between these 2, Etherium's creator revealed himself in public and roaming around the globe to raise awareness of his project to community while bitcoins`s founder still remain anonymously but his project dominate`s the market. Wow very hard to choose right?
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
Bitcoin is the first successful digital currency, and it was a revolution at the time.
The anonymity of the creator added to the awe around it.
Moving on, as knowledge on cryptocurrency increases. People now scrutinize ICOs more. And a well known creator is necessary. If he/she is an upstart. Then they could partner with a credible individual in that field.
September 03, 2018, 07:34:36 AM
I think I should call the developer better than any other name, whose name can not be called anonymous. For me, the most important thing is the incredible growth cycle of the market.
September 03, 2018, 06:02:24 AM
It a world full of speculations, we will always prefer transparency. We will always want to know the team or the person behind a project so that we can avoid being scam. Knowing them and their background is a huge trust factor. However, there are instances where developers tend to stay anon, especially in terms of security purposes.
August 09, 2018, 02:13:38 AM
I think this questions arising from the fact that the creator of the cryptocurrency Bitcoin is actually an anonymous person by the name of Satoshi Nakamoto, yes it's true that the revealing an identity creates trust in the product but bitcoin is the most popular product without any revelation
July 25, 2018, 06:31:12 PM
if we this questions come in 2015,, i would say its better an anonymous dev,, just like bitcoin 
but, for now, well known developer is the best choice, to reduce the risk from scam activity
but, for now, well known developer is the best choice, to reduce the risk from scam activity
July 25, 2018, 04:45:12 PM
Lots of ICO are conducting KYC why to know the identity of the investors. But lets reverse it this way on 2 biggest Crypto Bitcoin and Etherium. Bitcoin founder is Satoshi Nakamoto while Ethereum is Vitalik Buterin between these 2, Etherium's creator revealed himself in public and roaming around the globe to raise awareness of his project to community while bitcoins`s founder still remain anonymously but his project dominate`s the market. Wow very hard to choose right?
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
Bitcoin is an exception, except for a few projects like those that are related to anonymity coins the rest of the developers should reveal their identity and if they do not do it then that is a huge red flag and you should not invest in their project at all, I know there are some people that do not mind but with the amount of scams in the market we cannot be too reckless with our investments. Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
July 25, 2018, 02:49:11 PM
As everything in life, ith as pros and cons, and you must leverage these positives and negatives and see where the balance leans to.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
I agree with you! I would not also open my name and the names of my team members. Not in the names of the matter, but in their ingenious invention. Communicating your name to the public, a person who owns a lot of bitcoins (I'm sure) puts himself at risk.
The problem with not disclosing names is like I said the exit scam situation.
We don't know who satoshi, he has (allegedly) 1,000,000 BTC. We don't know if it's a group, a lot of people, or a single guy about to become the richest person on earth. It's kind of fucked up if you think about it.
But the same time, it was non viable that he would reveal his identity, it would only damage the project.
I guess in 70 years or so it will be reasonable to think he is dead and the coins will never move (assuming he was a young developer), assuming he doesn't leave them to someone else, which is just unlikely.
There's no easy solution to this. Maybe ideally satoshi should have coded something that made his coins slowly go back into circulation as mining rewards.
July 25, 2018, 12:58:46 PM
Lets come closer about it.
If someone create Coin about anonimity or provide anonymous service for me this team will be more transparent because if they reveal who they are this is joke and team could be manipulate by someone bigger. If they provide fruits of work they earn my believe like XMR team.
If someone create something what should be transparent or provide transparent service so yes I want them to tell us who they are. Because they should propably scam us.
If someone create Coin about anonimity or provide anonymous service for me this team will be more transparent because if they reveal who they are this is joke and team could be manipulate by someone bigger. If they provide fruits of work they earn my believe like XMR team.
If someone create something what should be transparent or provide transparent service so yes I want them to tell us who they are. Because they should propably scam us.
July 25, 2018, 12:53:18 PM
As everything in life, ith as pros and cons, and you must leverage these positives and negatives and see where the balance leans to.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
I agree with you! I would not also open my name and the names of my team members. Not in the names of the matter, but in their ingenious invention. Communicating your name to the public, a person who owns a lot of bitcoins (I'm sure) puts himself at risk.
July 25, 2018, 12:14:16 PM
IMO, it depends on whether the coin is raising funds from the public. In the case of raising funds, the investors will definitely want to know who is the team behind.
As for Bitcoin case, the community can choose to receive Bitcoin through mining or investing but there aren’t any crowd fund paying to Satoshi.
As for Bitcoin case, the community can choose to receive Bitcoin through mining or investing but there aren’t any crowd fund paying to Satoshi.
July 25, 2018, 11:44:39 AM
As everything in life, ith as pros and cons, and you must leverage these positives and negatives and see where the balance leans to.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
If you are an anonymous creator, your safety is going to be in better standing than if you are a public figure. If no one knows your real name and your appearance, you don't have to worry about having a visit in the middle of the night of thieves of sorts, going from random criminals to state-backed ones which will try to kill anything and anyone that dares to change the status quo (see how other attempts at alternative money ended up before Bitcoin)
It also helps the project and not having a clear leader in which people typically form cult personalities around. If the creator disappears, then it's up to the community. No one can ever have that much of an influence in the project. It's just not desirable to have a clear leader, with political views, opinions, and other things. Ideally you want someone totally anonymous, neutral, with no big claims on anything, just delivering the code then leaving, as satoshi did.
The problem with being anonymous is it generally raises the chances of an exit scam, since you would be easier for the creator to get the money and run without consequences.
July 21, 2018, 07:00:01 PM
revealed person is better, coz (in case i invest in x ICO) i want to know person whom i give trust to grow my money, is he capable or only has useless idea. i believe too you won't ask some strangers you don't know anything about them, or even only screen name to grow your money
July 21, 2018, 05:10:37 PM
Lots of ICO are conducting KYC why to know the identity of the investors. But lets reverse it this way on 2 biggest Crypto Bitcoin and Etherium. Bitcoin founder is Satoshi Nakamoto while Ethereum is Vitalik Buterin between these 2, Etherium's creator revealed himself in public and roaming around the globe to raise awareness of his project to community while bitcoins`s founder still remain anonymously but his project dominate`s the market. Wow very hard to choose right?
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
We would always prefer transparency when it comes to developers of a certain project because we don't like for us to be blinded on whose people behind it but well there are projects that do have anonymous developers but still they end up successful but only to few projects.Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
Example is Bitcoin itself we do know how anonymous Satoshi is but we do see on its creation flying with colors.
July 21, 2018, 02:43:12 PM
It's always better to know the background and capability of the developer be it any time. If you are comparing with Satoshi Nakamoto then it is an exception. Every developer isn't satoshi Nakamoto and they can't be.
incorrectly cited the example of satoshi nakamoto, who is an anonymous creator of crypto currency. But nevertheless, you believe that many of you believe in it, so maybe not every anonymous developer is a fraud.
I agree Nakamoto is not that anonymous he only became one after bitcoin succeeding in the internet, and I don't think Nakamoto is a good creator since the purpose of the coin was to be used on daily basis but instead it became an investment or an asset, it is a good thing Nakamoto made bitcoin but for it to take path on a different ways is not a good thing for the creator.
July 21, 2018, 02:41:40 PM
BITTTTTCONNNNNNNECT!! We all knew who they were. Didnt change anything.
July 21, 2018, 02:07:20 PM
developers who try to stay anonymous more times than not tend to be scam artist, the more you know about someone the more confidence ul have in a project.
Jump to: