Topic: Which do you prefer anonymous developer/creator or well revealed person? - page 4. (Read 620 times)

It is better to have a known developer, thanks to what Satoshi Nakamoto did, but he didn't ask us for money then to develop Bitcoin, he did it on is own and left the space when he feels other people are coming on board to drive the space forward. How many successful developers in the space can do this, it will be hard to find

Wow fair answer this make sense.But since then no project works on its own without putting ICO so we have a different situation from now and before. But in your opinion sir? ICO devs should be revealed? cause for me it should be and theres money not just money but some are big money involved with this.and its better to know whom your making a deal with.

Remember satoshi was creating bitcoin through use the blockchain effect only to give the more solution to the people to do online payment system. It's really different with ico. For ico i just prefer well-revealed person.
Because it gives the more guarantee for us, but as long as the project which has created by anonymous developer use fair distribution and it's fine.

Same with you, but I prefer the revealed creator because I think It is a person who dared to take risks, ready to accept criticism from the public and responsible person

It's clear to me, i would prefer to know who i am investing my money with. There has been simply too mean ICO exit scams to make it logical to invest your hard-earned money into something so risky. By knowing who the persons/team you are investing with, you at least are able to run after them with the law, incase they take your money.

Now I prefer known creator/developer, I know some have reasons why they hide themselves like Satoshi. But with so many schemes now I want to involved with new projects of known new creator/developer.

JL777 from Komodo has a track record going back years, so while he is anon, I wouldn't have a problem with investing in a new project from him.  However, if someone popped up today and was anon and was announcing an ICO I would be very skeptical.  It's not the name so much as the reputation behind the name. Either it's there or not.  If it's not there then it has to be earned.

I most likely prefer well known advisors (in legit way, not mcafee) There were too many scammy icos I am fed up with. All those bad icos had very unknown developers that hit and run.

I do not think about whether the creator is anonymous or publicly known. for me the most important is the extent to which its products can solve a problem and can be trusted by everyone to use or stored as a valuable asset.

Depend on what project it is. Of the project is well describes on the whitepapper and it is make sense i dont care if the developer is anonymous as long as the sorce code is opened at github. And be carefull that there are many ico put the picture of developer but it is fake pictures. I once find the project like that. And for start up which makes ico through ethereum network i prefer the dev appear for the conference and i have my own criteria to judge are that developer can really make the project worked or not.

Of course is to understand the more detailed the better! Too many frauds are too risky. The investment market is too active now. there must be a liar. it' s hard to tell true from false!

Don't really care about identity as long as the project is open source and can be audit/review by the public. I get that some people are still camera-shy in this day and age, while others loathe the limelight. Besides, public personality tend to lead to a cult of personality - so, I'd rather the project do the speak and not your face. Thank you

to answer this question i have to start with some basic facts.

when we are talking about bitcoin for instance we are talking about a decentralized currency. this may sound just like another random word but it has a deep meaning. a decentralized thing means it does NOT matter who created it, there is no owner, there is nobody with the "say" in how it will go and change in the future. there is a whole network that does all that. so when we say Satoshi Nakamoto created bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto can be anyone and it still wouldn't matter. it may be even a group of developers. in the end it is the decentralized network that decides what will be going on for bitcoin. and last year proved that perfectly when different proposals for scaling came up and the decentralized network decided its fate.

it also doesn't matter because it is open source and we can all see what bitcoin does. there is no trusting the creator here. it is trustless.

most of those projects that keep advertising about their developing team and creators are doing that because their projects aren't that good so they need a way to say "we have a strong team so our creation is good" but the reality will always triumph. for example ethereum is one of the worst altcoins that was created so far so the creator of it, Vitalik, has to go around and promote it  constantly to hype it up and get people to foolishly invest in it.

of course anonymous developer much more better compared to those revealed person,
it's much more safer because they(anonymous developer) do not have to worry about their safety,with that we could see that they can focus themself to create an advanced product or technology unlike those revealed person.
most of them were revealed themself because they want popularity,i also believe some of them got pressured by some people behind the scene.
also,cryptocurrency goals is anonymity and freedom.
so those act was out of cryptocurrency in my opinion

Can anyone tell me any project recently that has been very successful that has anonymous developers. Satoshi did the best thing them but the time has changed, we now have scams flowing around everyday deceiving investors and robbing the of their money. Centra is a good recent example assuming their faces were unknown they would have done that successfully

I believe for some coins with high anonymity it's safe for the devs to stay anonymous but for tokens/utility tokens, devs plus teams involved needs to be known 100%.

You cannot really make comparisons, satoshi created the first cryptocurrency and he was not sure if he was going to be arrested because of it you must remember that back in the day there were some arrests of people that created their own currencies, so satoshi was only trying to hid himself, now there are some anonymity coins in which their developers need to remain anonymous as well but for every other coin out there it is important to know who are the team of developers.

Even satoshi doesnt show himself on public but still we can really say that he do exist either as a 1 person or a certain group.We do know bitcoin is the first crypto circulates in the market which it would normally gain traction and popularity yet we have seen its usage and total capability when it comes to p2p payments.Anonymous but the project itself can be considered as a success and theres no doubt on that one.If we do talk into altcoin devs which are anonymous then this would already be an another story.

Komodo is going pretty successful even though their founders have pseudoanonmity. That being said I feel as the industry matures it is more important to have accountability from the founders, which is an important step on the path to regulation.

I won't touch a coin these days unless the creator is known and the management team atleast, bitcoin being an exception
Just too risky with the amount of scams going on