Bitcoin Forum

In recent times there has been several ICOs introducing KYC for bounty hunters, and that has made many Bounty hunters to feel bad.

I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.

The place I have issues with ICO projects running bounty programs is the idea of some projects that introduce KYC at the end of the bounty program which I really feel it should not be so. It is the same thing as those who used multiple accounts during the bounty because it will still reduce the amount the genuine hunters will earn.
If KYC should be introduced at the end of bounty, the left over coins/token should be distributed among the genuine hunters otherwise I see it as the same scam to the genuine bounty hunters:

Anyway, this is my own view, If you have a contrary view, please share it. I would like to know more also.

To be honest, you made some good points here, Many ICOs will wait until the end before telling the hunters that there will be KYC, whereas any body that is unable to complete KYC or refuses to go through KYC, they project will collect those token.

There's been several talks and discussions about the introduction of KYC requirements by bounty managers at the end of the campaign and this a lot of people have a problem with. Certain bounty hunters decide not to participate in bounties that require KYC. So, introducing it at the tail end of the campaign is against their will and for me, it's wrong.

Announcing KYC submission requirement at the end of the bounty is actually an unethical thing to do. If they wanted users to fill the KYC form,  they should have been warned before the users join. Some users like to stay anonymous and hesitates to share their identity online. So, legit bounty hunters like them might end up suffering. Again, those project that turns out to be scam, might also scam your identity by selling it at the black market. KYC has both its advantage and disadvantage.

Good point also, scam projects can sell your data to third part, so we should be careful on how and where we submit our KYC information.

In fact, holding the KYC procedure at the end of the company's bounty is a Scam. Even if the participant had several accounts, it does not give the right to companies to announce the KYC procedure at the very end. For some reason, the hunter may not want to go through this procedure or the company may not accept his documents ( I had one that did not accept my documents ). It turns out that the company hired hunters and just refused to pay them. I believe that the announcement of the KYC procedure at the end of the bounty company is a scam and unwillingness to pay bounty tokens to hunters.

KYC requirement should be clearly stated from the very start whether it is required or not AND that should never be changed even if managers reserve the right to modify some rules. Requiring KYC only at the end of the campaign is very unfair to all genuine bounty hunters that prefer to maintain their anonymity.

Imagine yourself joining a campaign because there's no KYC requirement only to be changed at the very end and you have to give up all those months of work. That feels like being scammed.

I think it is a great idea that ICOs have a KYC process. It helps to protect the project from fraud and scammers. But on the other hand, the safety of our personal data cannot be secured, if the ICO fails to meet its soft cap.

I noticed that if ICO projects ask to go through KYC, then these campaigns always paid me awards. Therefore, in the passage of KYC, I do not see anything wrong.

For greedy bounty hunters well, it is not good. How did I said that? it is because only one account per campaign is allowed and it is not good for bounty hunters that always tries to join multiple accounts just in one bounty campaign. Maybe if it is allowed, it still bad for me since my information is needed and I do not trust them.

Kyc is great method to protect bounty hunters and the project in general from different scammers. It helps to identify people that are using multi accounts or trying to scam the managers. Generally, you will get more rewards as a honest bounty hunter, when you pass the KYC.

It continues to absolutely amaze me how willing people are to send their documents to a completely unknown entity. You have absolutely no idea who you are sending your documents to - you have no way of knowing if the person is who they say they are. It is trivially easy to launch an ERC20 token and set up a website and a bounty campaign. Almost anyone can do it. And given that the vast majority of ICOs are scams, you are almost certainly sending your documents to a scammer/criminal.

Having your identity stolen is no laughing matter. It can ruin your life. Financially, you will spend months talking to police, banks, etc. trying to get it all cleared up, and even then, it can take years for you to repair the damage done to your credit, all the time being unable to get credit for anything - house, car, credit cards, even mobile phone contracts. Criminally, you can end up with a criminal record you didn't know you had and being summoned to court for crimes you didn't commit. You can have your driver's license suspended and be fired from jobs for things you didn't do.

I won't even participate in a KYC for an exchange. There are not enough tokens in the world to make me willing send my documents to a stranger.

I definitely think that the KYC may be important for those who buy the tokens or coins from ICOs, because they are called as customers. but for the bounty hunters, I don't think so.
Moreover, some bounties explain about the ways to fulfil the KYC after the end of the bounty and those who cannot pas it will not get any reward, even after working about more than 3 months. that's so bad. I think it will not be a matter when the BM tells us at the first campaign that they need KYC. But, rule is the rules, not to be broken.

Anything about KYC is not good to anyone.
It is just good for the ICO team,
But if the ICO requires the investors to do KYC why not to participants on their bounty?
Remember that we need to follow the rules.

I definitely agree. I think KYC is only for investors not for bounty hunters. Bounty hunters are anonymous workers that helps the project to spread the news. It does not makes any sense for bounty hunters to undergo KYC bevause based on my experiences on bounty hunting most of those projects that requires KYC are  majority that pays shitcoins. Though KYC has it's good side to counter cheater but still not good for us bounty hunters. Bounty hunters still prefer nonKYC bounty programs.

My view is that I do not advocate bounty hunters to introduce KYC. How to ensure the safety of personal information? Can you ensure that your personal information will not be sold to dark net? Do you guarantee that there will be no fraud? Many personal data can be purchased at dark net. How do you ensure authenticity? In addition. This will reduce the enthusiasm of many bounty hunters. The propaganda efficiency of the project will be greatly reduced. Encryption is built to protect privacy. This violates the original intention of encryption.

KYC is a completely unnecessary procedure. Bounty hunters are not investors, they are people who do work to promote the project. They should not be subject to the requirement to pass an KYC.

Yes, they have been writing about it for a long time. The KYC check against bounty hunters, which is announced at the end of the ICO, is unequivocally aimed at preventing certain part of the bounty hunters who for some reason are unable or unwilling to undergo such testing not to pay the tokens they earned. By that time, steaks or even tokens are already distributed, and those who fail the test lose their tokens and they are simply assigned by the ICO team or even the bounty manager if he distributes the tokens.

However, a KYC check should not be carried out due to the fact that some ICO bounty campaigners may use multiple accounts. To violate our right to own confidential information because of this, they are not entitled. In vain, some in this forum support KYC precisely because of this. The fact is that the requirement itself to pass such a check from bounty hunters is illegal. Such an audit should be carried out only in relation to investors who make their money. Tiebayte from the ICO team providing information on the basis of what document they require to be tested by bounty hunters and what exactly is written in such a document. They will not give you this, because it is not.

Filling in KYC is a rule that must be obeyed, not all projects have a KYC charge, but my own opinion when sending personal data is fear in my heart with the data submitted, fear of being misused and I feel no need to send KYC to be a gift hunter

I think KYC is required for participants in the bounty of the companies to avoid multi-accounting and other possible violations of the rules.

they make a database by collecting the data from the kyc and then sell them to diferent projects and these projects flood your email with their spam emails.. i will never ever share my personal information with any bounty.. it is not the thing to share

On the one hand it does not entail any consequences but on the other hand there is a possibility that your data will be sold on the black market which is not good because this information can be used by attackers in different ways. There are many cases when people found and stole their cryptocurrency, and this is the target audience

I do not think that KYC is necessary for the bounty participants, but when KYC is in the company of generosity - it adds confidence that the project will not be scam. IMHO

My concern to this KYC compliance to the bounty hunters is that the devs must announce this rule right from the start of the campaign, I encountered some projects that change the rules of their bounty that the participants must comply, some participants can't submit it for some reasons well that person will not be getting his/her designated tokens, the campaign might be getting more participants but in the latter part they will not be getting paid because as they can't submit KYC docs or they failed to pass it.

I think that KYC should be held at the beginning of the company, and not at the end of it. Because at the end of the company, many people are forgotten about the passage of KYC. As a result, it turns out that although all the way is passed. But for some reason you did not enter at the end of the KYC company, for that you will not receive tokens.

The only plus from KYC is that 70% of bounty hunters do not want to go through it and, accordingly, do not participate in this bounty company. Which of course increases the reward for company members.

The KYC that is given to bounty campaign participants is actually a very terrible risk because with the existence of KYC it is the same as your identity will not be safe anymore and surely there will be someone who uses your identity for actions that are not good and that is a risk when you do KYC

Well, from the view of a bounty hunter, I can't agree to promote a project which asks me for my personal documents. But, it is also true that, if you consider from ICO owner points of view, KYC must be done for the sake of their legal business.

Why would the bounty hunters have to kyc? It's just bullshit, it's just that the bonus managers want to make it hard to make a profit on themselves.

I completely support your view on this issue, KYC procedure is what we need to reduce scammers, and I think this should be specified at the start of bounty campaign. However, we take risks when providing our personal data.

Yes they should have said it at the first place.
They must have known already what is the rule of their country before even starting a large company which will take large amount of money from offering.

But what else could we do? Maybe they didnt really know also that their ICO will be completed or even get a large sum of money for their soft cap.
So for them to continue, they must abide with the government rules. That is KYC.
I know we all want to be anonymous here but in order to get your tokens just for once take the KYC.

It's great if it's only for investors since they're the ones risking more while bounty hunters doesn't except for their own time. You mentioned  KYC having pros and cons but in this situation the cons outweigh the pros for the bounty hunters because they only gain a small reward for this while they (people who have your info) can do whatever they want with it(sell, dox, etc). It's not that easy to trust people you don't know with your personal info.

Look at the signature/twitter/facebook campaigns in the service section you'll rarely see any cheaters/abusers involved and all of them don't have KYC.

The KYC check for bounty hunters is completely illegal. We should not pass such a check, because we are not investors in their projects and we can not launder dirty money.
Such a check can not be justified by the fight against multiple accounts. Especially since the ICO teams themselves are in many cases fraudsters and we voluntarily, believing them only to the word that they have the right to demand from us to undergo such verification, pass on our confidential information and copies of our passports. This is a complete absurdity.

There is no meaning of implementing KYC for bounty hunters because most of us don't want to reveal our identity because cryptocurrency is not legal in our country. It's true that it would lessen the spammers enrolling by alt accounts.

The current situation in the crypto market and the money campaign is usually to KYC. I always wondered if the original campaign see the rules of participation do not need KYC but then forced KYC to accept the token.If To be fair about KYC i will agree, but I'm very scared of using our KYC to sign up for other campaigns, what are we going to do?

There are several other means to eliminate scammers that don't require the need of personal information, which can be very annoying and dangerous, especially if info gets leaked to black market as the project turns out to be scam. I would be fine with one KYC provider and one-time verification for all bounties, but that is probably a utopia.

To be candid, your points are valid. I have seen instances and situations like that and i feel it is still cheating on the part of the project team and i can't say if the manager is also involved in it.
One thing i would recommend is that, even if KYC will be introduced for those who are comfortable with participating in such project, not at the end, but before the start of the project, the token allocated should be disbursed entirely to those whole passed the KYC.

A utopia for hackers.

One KYC provider for all ICOs would have a huge database of people and their information. Given the sheer number of ICO spammers on this forum, I would wager it would be at least in the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands.

If you consider the fact that many large and well established crypto exchanges have poor security, and many new exchanges have even worse than that, then I have no doubt a new site ran by some unknown entity to serve mostly scam ICOs would have awful security.

Hundreds of thousands of KYC information coupled with awful security = a perfect target for hackers.

I do not perceive KYC as something bad, but on the other hand this year there were a lot of fraudulent projects and many of them required to pass KYC and people sent their personal data. I think it's still very risky.

Again, me thinks it's more ethical to let people know from the get go. As a company, you should know the regulations governing your operations and activities before even starting off. So, they should as well include that as part of their prerequisite for joining their public sale or participation in their bounties. But it looks as though these guys deliberately keep that information from bounty hunters and lure them into participation and then they don't have no choice than to do KYC eventually since they must by all means claims their tokens.

The recurrent fear of one's documents ending up in the wrong hands is the fear of many and the reason a lot bounty hunters stay away from bounties that require KYC to claim tokens. For some, it's better to lose once stakes and tokens to cheats, than losing one's identity to fraudsters who will use it for nefarious activities and the damages caused can take a lot of time to repair.

The decision regarding the KYC process for bounty hunters does not only depend on the dev team. This kind of decisions are reviewed by lawyers and project developers, just have to do everything in accordance with the law of the country in which the project is registered.

I think that this procedure should be mandatory only for investors. Because participants in the Bounty are usually people who do not invest their money in a project. They are not investors and therefore should not undergo this procedure.

I think you are giving far too much credit to the ICO market to suggest that lawyers are making decisions regarding KYC. I very much doubt the vast majority of ICOs have even considered the legal challenges of their project, let alone consulted a lawyer about them.

The majority of ICOs are scams, and the few that aren't usually have a completely unprepared and unknowledgeable team behind them that struggle to produce a coherent whitepaper or roadmap. They try to pay everyone in their worthless tokens because they want to spend as little money as possible on their trash project because they know it is likely to fail. There is no way they are going to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to have a lawyer look through their project and advise them on the intricacies of KYC requirements for bounty participants.

KYC for bounties is almost always so they can avoid paying or so they can steal your data.

KYC for bounty hunters are very annoying. It's unethical thing in the first place. Why would you announce KYC if the bounty ends has done? This is really pissed off.
That's why Dapps is the future among all the ICO, projects.

Never, the bounty hunter currently earns so little that it is possible to trade off personal information about someone or an organization on the internet. Because they can get that information and do a lot of things in the world

in any case, to provide personal data ethical is not difficult. That's just really do not need to annoy users and warn about it in advance.

KYC is good at some point like avoiding the scammers but need to be the process of KYC seamless means easy to do. Many ask for Full KYC and that takes really much time. Many ask for the KYC at the end of bounty and main fails to do KYC for their own reason and can't get the reward also. It's good if they announce in the starting. Major scammers, we found in the social media bounty more over the others bounty.

By having KYC how exactly would that be conducive to any bounty program unless it applies to the bounty manager in order to give confidence to bounty participants?

Yes, KYC is never been a bad idea considering that there are a lot of cheaters today but the timing on when they ask for KYC is the one that frustrates bounty hunters. Asking for KYC documents after the bounty campaign is very frustrating to bounty hunters.

As a bounty hunter i have no problem doing kyc. This kyc procedure is good so as to avoid members who do bounty with multiple accounts. But they should clearly state from the start that the bounty campaign needs kyc.

and I would also like to be sure that such a Bounty company will bring a really good income so that the risk of providing personal data is justified.

Who would feel happy sending their ID to bounty managers?

Not me

Asking for KYC on bounties is never a good idea,  a good bounty manager should be able to manage his/her bounty well with an accurate spreadsheet.  Asking https enter to upload documents is not necessary,  KYC is for the investors because their coin is distributed directly by the ICO team not from the bounty manager

Totally wrong, sometimes there's an ICO that regulate  even for bounty hunter to submit their KYC because simply the project is distributing money to that people aswell.
It's not wrong though, what's wrong is when the ICO is scam and asking for KYC, our data could be stolen.

KYC has now widely being used in ICOs and I think its a nice idea and it is helping them. Now it has also being used in bounties and I think its also a good idea because it will help fish out those using multiple accounts for the bounties.

I don't think it's very good for us, since one of the best things of cryptos are the anonymity, and the KYC requirement challenges that resolution, so I don't think it's necessary and even less for a bounty that probably won't succeed for that same reason.

Who would receive the KYC?

Is the ID going to be with the bounty manager or the actual company running the ICO? Or both?

Sending ID to "people over the internet" is not a good idea especially if it might be shared without consent.

For other bounty participants it is just a waste of time but personally ,i do think that it would be better for bounty programs to promote KYC in order to promote fairness on bounty campaigns. Some people are using multiple accounts which is prohibited. Therefore, those who are using two or more accounts won't be able to receive their rewards from doing such thing.

it is difficult in non english countries and make it difficult for teen bounty hunters to participate

Now many bounty managers have seen that most hunters are using multiple accounts thereby cheating in campaigns so the only way they could do that was to introduce KYC into the bounties. It's a good idea and I like it.

Generally bounty hunters as i know don't disagree about requiring kyc
because kyc requeing the valids ids which ine of the dangerous
Bounty hunter want to anonymous their identity for the security reason

It is okay for the sake of credibility and avoid certain scam accusations. Some bounty hunters out there have alt accounts, so if they were able to join those accounts in certain bounties they would have a hard time proving them real and not only just alts. Not only we can remove the abusers but also we can make this forum clean of account farmers so I guess KYC is a good idea.

KYC is good for the following rules that promote security tokens- Bounty hunters hates KYC coz we all know that the government authority wants to control every identity of a person who can able to hold huge amount of money and this is really a bad situation for us.

I think that it is bot really secured to give your personal data when investing or doing bounties in crypto. It is dangerous, especially to investors since you are not aware on how will they keep your personal information safely. It can be used in illegal activities.

Whatever has advantage also has its own disadvantage. KYC can help to reduce scam rate, which invariable reduces the rate at which people cheat during bounty campaign. Then if a scam project collects your personal data through KYC, that might be a risky thing to do.

Well, maybe the idea of KYC for bounty participants is not bad, but it is necessary to warn about it at the beginning of the company. People should know all the conditions of participation and choose to agree with them or not. I try to avoid such bounties where KYC is required.

Right.There are really advantages and disadvantages a KYC brings.But let's face the fact that almost all of the bounties today require KYC so we have no escape but to face them if we really want to still gain profits in bounty.

What you write scares me. In my opinion, it is quite the opposite - most ICOs are legit projects and even have to cooperate with lawyers. Of course, I respect your opinion, but I absolutely disagree with it.

I can agree that most ICOs require KYC verification but from tokens sale investors, not from participants of bounty campaigns, is a very small percentage of ICO that requires this procedure from bounty hunters.

Anyway, I agree that ICO attracted a lot of scammers - definitely too much!

We all have different views about KYC but you are right ICO campaign manager should not change the rules at the last minute because some bounty hunters do not want to share their personal information with anyone, this is a sure sign that the project and bounty manager is not honest and transparent on how they are running their bounty campaign.

actually this is contrary to the anonymous crypto itself, but the ico developers claim that KYC is required by the procedure of their legal team, even though the actual bounty hunter is not needed.

Actualy my opinion about this KYC to the bounty partcipants is not good because,this is only means that they would not trusted to us,and they want to prosecute to us to claim our bounty rewards,threfore my conclusion about this are everythings is under control to the ICO project campaign that we partcipated either they want to proposed an kyc or not,and we as only bounty partcipants we must follow on what instruction they stated.

I'm neutral on the whole KYC issue as long as it's fully disclosed at the beginning and not added after I start a bounty.  They could be using KYC to avoid payment at that point.

there are many who object to KYC for bounty hunters. but if you don't do it then you will never get a reward from the ico project token. I understand this is confusing but there is no other way just by registering KYC

It's an act of stupidity, and if you check well you will also find out that is either the project host the bounty their self and trying to find a why out to reduce what to pay or the bounty managers who usually receive the whole token left for bounty to be distribute to the participants trust me they will find the possible means to reduce to their own benefit.  End time introduction of KYC is scam by the project itself

KYC for bounty hunters is bad practice but for investor is good,But now a days many projects first don't tell about KYC for bounty hunters and at the end of ICO they ask for KYC. This is also very bad practice.

So am I, A project that asking KYC for their bounty hunter doesn't seems right, after all of our struggle to help on promoting their project, we are asked something that i think isn't necessary, especially when the coins has a little value after it got listed in the market.

Well, I don't think it's a problem ... KYC is used to find out the identities of their supporters. well, but maybe some bounties don't require that, because sometimes bounty hunters are just those who help support the development of the project through advertisements. yeah, but it all depends on the project.

I hate that fact as well that some projects implement KYC at the end without informing at the start of the campaign. Some hunters are conservative on giving up some important info due to identity theft and frame up. I understand this, but KYC has also good point to limit the campaign to legit participants. The problem here arises if the project was a scam and you already did the KYC. This is dangerous as your data can be used on fraud activities.

I am thinking in the same direction with you, I believe KYC is a good thing to weed off scammers and reward good bounty hunters but I think it is not good when you don't inform people about the KYC at the early stage, as it is required some countries will not be allowed to go through KYC and it is bad for such hunters after doing the bounties for months.

Look at ICO if there sayed what some country residents cant participate in the ico, be sure at the of bounty camp they ask kyc from you.
because you can be citizen of resticted country and they cant give you tokens

That's the point, with how those many ico's turned into scam project and if you already provided your KYC, there's also some chances that they might used it illegally, the point of KYC is really good for well succeeded project maybe after the bounty ends up they can ask for KYC before receiving the rewards in this case the managers and the team will be assured or maybe have a big chance that the campaign is not being populated by cheaters.

I have seen some scammers have been selling the investor's email in this forum. It will have the same way with these emails if you have sent your identity to the scam project. They will try to convert it to the money. The KYC requirement can be applied if the token has already distributed to the investors and there are some markets that have listed it.

I find KYC checking for bounty hunters illegal. The ICO team does not have the right to require identification from headhunters. Moreover, the requirement to provide such data at the end of the ICO, after the bounty hunters perform the agreed work, will be even more illegal if it was not previously stated in the conditions of joining the ICO signature campaign. This is definitely reminiscent of fraud for the non-payment of earned tokens.

It is true that it reduces scammers, but only to be a hunter for gifts seems like it doesn't need to be done, moreover it is not necessarily that the projects that are followed make a lot of money. in my opinion that will add complexity to participating

As a bounty hunter, i feel that KYC is just like one of nightmare in cryptocurrency world.
I believe other bounty participant will feel that way too.

KYC for the bounty can be quite good if the goal to reduce the double account is pretty much obsolete. but many who thus avoid this because it considers it unsafe in shipping identity because it can be abused by the other party. will probably need some consideration also for this though for ICO and bounty is quite important for the sake of clarifying the existing distribution of flow.

a savvy guy can actually still do multiply accounts to participate in bounties, all he needs is the passport of someone else. so with IP address filtering anyone can participate with proxies. its not hard to do it if there is the motivation. i hate KYC but what else can we do. investors were asked for KYCs, all the more to bounty participants.

worse thing than that, if some "bad people" sell email and password of users that register in their site. Although not much people who submit same password in every site, it still can dangerous because hacker can take advantage from that. KYC itself we can't avoid it if some project make regulation about it. So be careful when pick project and input your data.

Kyc is not good for bounty hunters in terms of their privacy what if they send information to a unsuccessful project or scammers. High possibilities that those profile will use in illegal businesses. We dont know much about it, just more safe if we remain anonymous in this field

I am afraid you are mistaken.

https://www.investopedia.com/news/80-icos-are-scams-report/

81% of ICOs are outright scams. Add that to the 6% that fail outright, and the 5% that just "go dead", it takes the total amount of trash ICOs to over 92%.

Less than 2% of ICOs were "successful" in this study. However, "successful" only meant that they had a beta of a product, a roadmap and some github activity - a very low bar to be set, and really the bare minimum that any ICO should reach. And we all know plenty of projects which fulfill these criteria that still go on to be worth nothing or turn out to be scams.

In my opinion KYC for Bounty Hunters is perfectly reasonable. Because it will strictly manage the number of participants in the campaign. However the weakness is that the information we provide may be leaked to the market and bad guys take advantage.

Introducing KYC to Bounty was and still remain the Best decision and method to Phish out those set of hunters using multiple accounts or those that are in the habit of stealing other people's work and claim ownership of it. KYC is good and I welcome the idea only if our information are safe with them. I have a friend who is scared of KYC till date because she doesn't trust them with her personal Profile information because of those scam project out there.

Agree, kyc isn't bad as most ico are left with no choice, i think ico have to be compliance with the new regulations.
It is dubious to introduce it at the end of the bounty campaign, cheating asides a lot of hunters wouldn't want to submit their documents.

I like your opinion and I agree with it. As we know, KYC has a use as a medium for verifying user data. So, if KYC is used to verify the data of the bounty hunters themselves it is not a bad thing. This can also avoid the occurrence of multiple account usage in 1 campaign and there is nothing to be afraid of doing KYC because crypto is no longer anonymous.

But it is true that you say that if this campaign want to do KYC for bounty hunters, they must notify at the outset, not at the end of the campaign. Because if there are many bounty hunters who are not ready for KYC and want to remain anonymous then they will definitely leave it. This clearly becomes unfair because the campaign did not have any commitment from the start.

I also do not see anything wrong with this, but still it seems to me that there should be at least some guarantees that your data will not be delivered somewhere to another place or to other people

If KYC is needed by those to whom I trust, then I will gladly do it, but often the project turns out to be a scam, and our data is sold in the darknet.

Of course, for scam projects, Our data will be sold everywhere. With the airdrop required kyc like today, surely 100% of those projects are scam and are trying to steal our information, and only a few bounty is required KYC and I see most of them are legit

in my own opinion the kyc (know you custome)  is a great verification process that can ensure the safety of every individual, 
through this all bounty hunters are in the good hands.

I believe that this verification is in fact vital, as it gives us the opportunity to minimize the number of scammers in bounty programs.

I do not like this procedure, not because I hide something, but because it is not safe to share my documents due to dubious profits. There are no guarantees that my documents will be safe in the future, and this is alarming.

if the process is easy, I will like it. but the fact is that the process of cyc is very difficult, even though it has entered the correct data and documents, the rules are also followed correctly. so that's all that needs to be fixed.

In this several months most of the ICOs are not required KYC because they have notice that many bounty hunters are not paticipating there bounty campaign and your probably right those bounty hunters are not complete their KYC their token will goes to the who are holding the project.

for the bounty hunter, KYC can be bad things like abused in identity theft. even the system of KYC should not also apply to the bounty hunter because they basically are not the customers who become a funny thing if they set this thing let alone the KYC is informed when a bounty is finished and you want to do payment. of course, inevitably bounty hunter resigned to give for the sake of payment obtained.

KYC for bounty hunters doesn't seem too good because maybe your data and identity are not anonymous anymore and there will be people who will know and have your identity, it's very dangerous.

Some Bounty projects provide KYC procedures for Bounty participants. However, there are many people who think positively and negatively. I personally see KYC is very good because I also got a payment. In fact, many fraud participants are reduced.

I agree with you. I'm one of those who want to stay anonymous. It would be fine if the project is legit but how if the project turned out to be scam like you said? I've read a reddit post about scam project selling the KYC data on the dark web even the price will be jumped if they have passport scan. If the purpose of KYC is to reduce the scammers, i think proof of authentification is enough.

I consider introducing a KYC check at the end of the ICO or after it is completed, I consider it just an ordinary fraud by the ICO team. Already during this period, such a check can only be carried out with the aim of not paying the maximum part to bounty hunters of the tokens they earned. Some may not provide such copies of documents, which are sometimes required during such an inspection. For example, I live now at the place of my registration and I cannot submit relevant documents confirming my residence at the place of registration. I do not violate any laws of my country. At the same time, I first work on advertising the ICO project and in the end I get paid nothing for my work. Terms of the agreement to pay for work should always be first, before the work itself, so that I have the right to choose. Otherwise, it's just a hoax.

In my own opinion , requiring KYC for bounty hunters is not a good idea, for the reason that the bounty hunters are the number one source of promoting the project will to the social media and public audience. If the management will require KYC for them then many other bounty hunters will not be verified if the don't have enough validations and it can cause to reduce the number of promoters of the project/s.

It's absolutely brutally bad to ask of kyc for bounty Hunter. Who knows where the documents are gonna end up with . The team should Inform prior hand if such a need exists so we can decide to participate or not .

As a rule, after passing KYC, bounty hunters do not provide tokens to those who did not pass KYC.

In my opinion, KYC is not required for Bounty hunters because they do not invest real money, so there is no need to check their identity.

kyc for bounty hunter is not good and i am not in favor. it is hard to find out if an ico is serious, so i do not want to give out my data. i prefer to forgo a bounty campaign when she calls kyc.

If the ICO project can provide us with their KYC to prove the authenticity of the project, then I am very willing to participate in projects that need to provide their own privacy. I think this is fair.

KYC helps bounty managers cut out unscrupulous bounty hunters and thus reduce their costs of working with members.

By applying KYC to a bounty hunter is a very good one, because that show how serious of the work and also a very good to be implemented before starting registration, Secondly KYC is simply know as Know Your Customer and is very simple and easy to register, Finally KYC gives the actual account of number participate.

Of course , KYC means personal verification. When everyone can give KYC in banks and other places , then what's the problem with bounty campaigns.

The very moment bounty hunters do feel about kyc is when they have no information about it earlier enough for them to participate in it then they feel bad if not so kyc is for a very good purpose thanks

A bank is in front of me and the staff are available to me. So it is ok for me to trust a bank with my data. In a bounty campaign, i do not know the operator and he is somewhere in the world. That is why i find it hard to trust a bounty campaign with my data and that is why i do not like kyc.

I think it is a great option to protect the ICO investors from a big dump and to protect the bounty hunters from cheaters that are using multiple accounts to gain more coins. Also, you should be sure that the project is legit, before sending your docs.

This is a stupid statement. In this case, fraudsters, in addition to investor funds, will be able to sell personal data and copies of documents to both investors and bounty hunters.
I have the impression that here they are trying to convince us that it is good to transfer our copies of documents to fraudsters. It is also good to be tested by KYC after the end of the ICO, when you can be told, for example, that you have not passed the KYC check due to political motives. And there are such cases. The ICO teams now have the opportunity, due to this verification, to refuse anyone to pay their earned tokens. Does anyone think this very well?

Personally I see nothing wrong with KYC, the only area I don't like is when after at the end of the bounty the company change the rules demanding for KYC.

KYC for bounty campaign seems like a good step because it will make traders less because no one will cheat on bounty campaigns. But when many participants from the bounty campaign will only make it difficult for managers to check all the KYC of the participants.

I believe that this is of course already a Chur came,because many are trying to throw Bautista, and with all these KYC, so I would recommend not to have any checks,so I've lost a significant portion of the token at this

Do you think this can stop scammers? My friend what year we live. Giber prispnost now has a high level. Our personal data is sold in large quantities. Do you think I want to go through this procedure after this? And if the project was originally aimed at collecting your personal data. And this is all served to us under protection.

If you can’t see the essence of the problem itself. Just think. Use Google. View information. Then don't mind why your MEW attacked and stole your coins.

I think that's ridiculous.Why do I give all my information to these people because I share it with Facebook?I think it's against the whole system.So it's contrary to bitcoin's philosophy.

KYC is good but if that's procedure is easy, some KYC procedure so critical. So I think project owner should take simple KYC just be our national identity card. KYC helps to protect multiple account owner and is spammer.

I know bounty managers and other ICO teams will come and defend it but to me KYC is actually not relevant if you correlate it with the reason why they ask for it. Given out your personal details to an unknown person is really risky since you cannot trust anyone of late.

I see in kyc only pros, in bounty many bots which go in signature or same social networks,  and so of course kyc here salvation

It's a little bit inconvenient for bounty hunter but I don't think KYC for bounty hunters is difficult as investors of ICO. It's very easy to pass KYC of a bounty campaign but I didn't do all KYC of all bounty campaigns that I joined because I only do KYC with bounty campaign which I think it's trustworthy.

Completely agree with the statement that KYC is not bad procedure because it is a something like the minimal guarantee that too many cunning persons would not earn tokens with their multiply accounts, but in my opinion the KYC procedure must be before the accepting the participant to the campaing, because you may participate and earn lots of tokens and after that just somehow technically do not pass the KYC.

This is exactly the whole problem. The project developers are in no hurry to provide detailed information about themselves, but require their investors and bounty hunters to provide detailed information. It is not fair at least.

KYC verification is not intended to prevent bounty hunters from using multiple accounts at the same time. In principle, the ICO teams do not care. They need to write quality messages and advertise their ICO project. If you think that checking KYC will remove multi-accounts, then do not expect it either. You can use the data of your relatives and friends and send copies of their documents. Or just take a sample of the document and use the usual available programs to draw any document. Even if it is exposed, no one will bear any responsibility for such a fake, since the ICO team has no official status and its authority to collect such information is very problematic, and it is completely illegal with regard to headhunters.
The KYC check definitely brings us more harm and no good.

Indirectly this method might turn the decentralized system into a centralized system, at least this would change and if all cryptocurrency users were willing to provide their personal information, each party would know the assets of other people, then cryptocurrency that is always glorified as an anynomous thing will disappear.

The only one good thing is that it will reduce the number of bounty participants that will receive tokens, so there will be less sellers and you will be able to sell it for higher price ;).

There is nothing good on the part of bounty participants nor even on investors side.
It is 100 percent on the ICO TEAM side and nothing more. this will just give danger on the identity of one person together his or her ID and national documents.
Your place of living is at risk also which is not really good to have.

Pass KYC in order to get the award you will have if you want to take part in a normal bounty company. The main thing is to be careful and do not run into scams.

This is the problem with bounty campaigns, ICOs and bounty managers have all the controls and authority. They have the rights to change and implement new rules.

I have been involved in a number of ico as a bounty Hunter most of them are straight forward while others are difficult to pass. I think it would not hurt at all if the process of passing kyc is made easy and seamless

I am against this check because you send your data to completely anonymous people who can then do anything with them

The best way is to limit the participants, as long as the bounty hunters can deliver what is needed they don't have to go through KYC I only do KYC to project that I believe has a good potential in the market and where the company is compliant, I have read a lot of reports of ICO going away after the ICO.

That is, I strongly agree if KYC is used to reduce the existence of multiple accounts. But the implementation must be planned so that the allocations provided for honest and fully supportive bounty hunters can get paid accordingly, there are no wasted tokens or coins that either later belongs to them.

I think the KYC has no place for bounties. The reason why KYC is demanded from ICO investors is for prevention of money laundering. You don't have such need for bounties.

It now seems that so many people are now conscious of kyc. Well, i think we are now tending towards that time, where every project would be demanding for kyc from their participant. Well, it is a good approach, but everyone should do their research, to ensure that the project is not scam.

I agree with the need for KYC for bounty, but should only be applied to bounty hunter who earn a token number worth over $ 1,000. And the bounty hunter earn less, it should not because it will take time for the project team as well as bounty hunter

I don't see any reasons why KYC for bounty hunters may be good.  I mean, I understand why KYC is needed for investors.
It can help to protect them and a project. Some projects are needed it for legal norms.
But for bounty hunters. If I see KYC in bounty. No matter at the begining or end of project. I will leave from them.

bounty hunters should not need to do kyc because it is not an investor but it is very good idea to reduce cheating such as using someone's account and using more than one account so cheating can be overcome

I think KYC for bounty hunters is not good because there is a possibility to use our personal information for scam. It's really unjust when it happens after stealing your tokens you are supposed to receive then follow your personal details? We may lose our dignity. For me it is only fair to ask KYC if every bounty hunter will receive $ 200 usd and above. KYC must first implement to the project team and bounty managers. Its hard to support  bounty campaign asking for KYC unless for a good reason.

That is true, there are a lot of bounty cheaters that are joining with multiple accounts. That is why some ICOs have their KYC for bounty hunters. However, I think this should be announced at the beginning of the bounty, not after the bounty. Because sometimes they use KYC to delay the distribution.

In my opinion KYC does not guarantee bounty hunters absolutely nothing. This is a fairly simple procedure and you willingly agree to it, you think that this is done in order not to break the law and clean the project from scams. But if the project turns out to be a fraud, your data can be used by fraudsters for personal purposes or sold to third parties.

There is actually no legal requirement that makes companies require KYC from bounty hunters. The reason that they do it is to prevent people signing up to the bounty campaign through multiple identities. It would be nice if there was one centralised platform for doing KYC that could verify that you are a unique user so you don't have to do KYC for each project.

There is projects with kyc and there is and without him , I think that if you not likes kyc the you can not fulfill these bounty, but for me in the last time this adds only + in project because that number of people much less is participating

I have nothing against KYC, only if it helps in the fight against fraudsters. And I also understand that the bounty hunters, who have to give their personal data, do not like this very much.

Asking bounty hunters to observe the KYC obligations is just like engaging a marketing agency to help market your product, and subject them to series of tasks before paying them their money.

I believe Cryptocurrency community is still evolving; but i foresee a future where bounty hunters gets paid on the shortlist of their work.

KYC for bounty hunters is purely a delay tactics in making payment.
That should be limited to the investors.

ON THE OTHER HAND
The reason can be security conscious; to help in tracking stolen coins. But that doesn't imply that bounty hunters should be subjected to that else; pay them in USD, Ether, BTC or other currencies.

Like you already made mention of the issue we all have with kyc stuff, I still don't get the point of introducing kyc later in a bounty project and not stated earlier so it can all be trusted this what they need. The problem someone like me have most is that we don't have most what they approve for kyc is either denied or on review for as long as.

If they stated that they need KYC for verification people will get less interest and lower publication. Most of the ICO are doing that way, there's rarely people that giving away KYC for merely few dollars and that is the very reason of why they are trying to hide the fact, also with KYC there'll be always unclaimed coin.

To my mind it is ok sharing your data, but if you don't want to do that,then skip bounty or buy fake documents. In dark net it is not a problem

From what I understand on OP's post some of the ICO required KYC at the end of campaign which is not totally cool although they have the authority to change the rules anytime but if it comes with the issue of KYC then they should tell it from the start so bounty hunters will have time decide whether to join or not on that particular bounty campaign.

ICOs are implementing KYC rules not because of their bad mood or just because they want to let us feel sad. They have to do this, they are forced by regulators, don't you understand? If there were no such rules for them, they would never make people go through KYC.

I think for the procurement of KYC on a project it is very important if you hold a bounty campaign because the existence of a regulation on bounty campaign will be able to anticipate fraudulent bounty hunters in registering multiple accounts in a bounty project

I think it's a good idea that ICO / Bounty Campaign has a KYC process, Kyc is a good method to protect bounty hunters and projects in general from different scammers.

Yes, the developer team has the right to know who their token holders are to avoid abuse, it could be, of course, there is something to do with regulation. Because we know there are some countries that prohibit cryptocurrency. Focusing on the bounty, we have a goal to avoid multiple accounts, I strongly agree to that.

You are totally right. KYC process takes money and time. Nobody would like to spend time and money just to keep investors database. Don't make sense.

I have already joined bounty that needs KYC, to be honest at first i am afraid to fill it in, but i realize that why should i don't? And why i feel bad too? besides i have never see anything bad on it. And yes it can help bounty managers to locate multiple accounts and even scammers as will. From then i joined Bounty that required KYC or not and i hope that this could not be a problem in the future.

I believe that at some points it can be beneficial, but in general I do not believe that it provides enough to the ecosystem to be highly necessary, other less invasive regulatory measures can be implemented, which would provide a similar effect, we always have to think about the purpose that cryptos have before taking any action.

You were right. Although at first I was very negative about the introduction of the KYC procedure for bounty hunters and believed that it is necessary only for investors. But now I understand that this is a forced measure, because people who use multiple accounts very much. It was necessary to fight against it.

it is not safe for bounty hunter because they sent their document to unknown person, maybe they will use our documents to do something bad.
but KYC is very useful to prevent scammers and frauders in some bounties.

I'm not against KYC, but only when about it is warned at the beginning of the company. When it is introduced at the end and then do not distribute the tokens of eliminated participants between those who passed the KYC, it is unfair. Team just need to do everything normally and then there will be less scams.

in my opinion KYC is indeed needed now to reduce the frauds that have occurred so far, so the gifts we get from bounty are fair and equitable.

I have nothing against the KYC procedure.If I trust the project, it will not be difficult for me to send them my documents. It helps to fight with multiaccounts and so I think KYC is a good idea.

Yes it can prevent those greedy people from taking advantage the campaign, but hopefully those who will ask for the KYC are the real project and not a scam one.

Many people are scared to fill up the KYC form because they protect their own identity from the scam projects. The decision is still yours, whether to participate on a bounty or not it is still your choice.

However the project must also be trustworthy otherwise the people will be risking their identity, here we are talking about a real identity that someone will have forever and can get us into trouble if misused not some toy. All project that requires KYC must undergo government inspection and being approved by the government

For bounty hunters there is nothing good in the procedure of passing the KYC, as at the moment there is a fairly high risk that you will get to the project, which eventually turns out to be fraudulent and your data will be stolen.

Well in my point of view KYC is good for bounty hunters to avoid fraud attempt. But im not sure to give my information to someone that i dont know. I have no idea what will happens next. I hate it when the bounty almost done and they change the rules to fill kyc for claiming reward.

There are some benefits but the risk is high as well.
Bounty participants if we are talking about fraud, the risk is very small to the devs as the devs are in control here.
It always depends on their ability to check the work done, then they will be able to pay the right amount due.

Yes it is good indeed to have KYC for bounty hunters but bounty hunters also must take some precautions because of the scam bounty projects that only get personal data and gone, real project must also be transparent to the rules.

Well, show me the law. In most countries persons a free and don't need to collect personal data to launch an ICO. Exception is USA where the SEC controls funding and it's illegal to invest in ICO or launch an ICO because it distributes mone from the rich to the poor.

My opinion about KYC for Bounty participants is very good. Because KYC itself is used to identify customers. And it has often been used and the result is that many users use multiple accounts to reduce. And this certainly has a good goal, but you have to be careful about this.

Honestly, it is not good, because kyc was just required on the investors in the project. But if the team also includes the bounty hunter on these regulation, then we have no choice but to comply, in order to get the rewards.

what you say is true and I strongly agree that bounty must require KYC on bounty hunters but I sometimes feel annoyed if KYC has to use passport, because I don't have passport and if it is a bounty I've to do KYC, in my opinion it is enough to use national ID

Yes, I agree. Also it is probably worth pointing out that if a project only mentions KYC once everyone has done the bounty work, then I think this makes them look unprofessional and like they don't really know what they're doing - which is a bit of a warning sign for the project as a whole. Obviously by that point you've already put the work in for the bounty, but it's worth remembering when considering any further investment.

I don't believe it's necessary for bounty hunters to undergo kyc. It should be for only ico participants since its part of some countries AML law and requirements. Besides, majority of them sell participants kyc information

You can pass the KYC in the same bounty company using the data of your friends or relatives. This does not affect people who have many accounts. In addition, I do not think that you will participate in the same bounty using multiple accounts.

I do not think that this check is a good idea, because due to it we risk losing our personal data

i think yes, because so many cheater in bounty hunter they can use 10-100 account in 1 person.
si kyc is good to delete cheater in bounty hunter so that all participant can get the same reward, different on follower or rank.

It is really good. I have seen someone do even hundreds of articles. LOL. KYC will limit cheater, this is necessary and I always support.

This is a great data check and it gives us the opportunity to remove scammers from bounty campaigns.

I really doubt bounty KYC is a good option most bounty managers announce KYC after the bounty leading to a lost of your stakes if you dont do that i think is better to announce forehand and also i think it just pile the number of of KYC and can make their work even harder

KYC for bounty hunter is very very ok because it helps to curb cheaters, some people still find ways to cheat with it but it is mostly curtailed once KYC is involved, so far so good.

I believe KYC for bounty hunters is both good and bad because I dislike doing KYC as a bounty hunter but it is also good because it helps to filter out the cheaters and unserious people.

KYC should be announced prior to the beginning of the bounty and then hunters can chose if they want to participate under KYC conditions or not. In the reality ICOs can change the rules and do whatever they want without any consequences. The situation is different with security tokens as for them to have KYC is a legal requirement .

One of the aims of KYC as you said earlier was to eradicate or  fraudulent peoples, now many ICO are implementing such a system. This way the multi account players will disappear.

Good points you made. Kyc verification is OK for projects and ICo's, it is used to reduce people with plenty accounts and scammers. However, i feel its not a good option for bounty hunters because they should be paid for the work done, if they decide to work more with one or two accounts, it's their time they are spending. Now, most projects don't ask for kyc verification until after the bounty is over then they ask, after all the work done to avoid paying some people because they know some would fail verification.... That's deceit and not fair at all.

in my opinion, the steps taken by the ICO that introduced KYC to bounty hunters were good. however, I am not sure of the impact that is generated. because bounty hunter participants can still manipulate their data by borrowing other people's KYC. my advice is there are other steps to be effective.

I don't think most of the bounty hunters like that idea , It is very annoying when some bounty asks for KYC , It must be some substitute way to don't do it , I don't like to have my identification revealed!

giving an announcement to fill KYC at the end of the bounty was a very embarrassing thing to do for the ICO project itself.
because they indirectly cheated bounty participants by reducing the number of allocations for bounty reward and they also damaged the image of their project by doing that.
if they really want to disqualify participants who are cheating on bounty with KYC, they should screen participants before the bounty starts.
because there are also bounty participants who really joined to promote the project but want to stay anonymous.

Obviously, I think it would be useful. because there are thousands of participants in bounty spreadsheets because of the many users who use bots. therefore, many people cannot afford their labor.

By itself, the KYC procedure is necessary and there is nothing wrong with it. But the way it is carried out for investors and bounty hunters is necessary to change(improve) as there are many options to cheat the system and send false documents.

I don't think KYC for bounty hunters is good, KYC just makes the program seem legitimate. It does not guarantee the success of the project. The success of the project depends on many different factors such as ideas, development teams, etc

this is too risky when many ICO scams and their vague backgrounds allow theft of personal data from users and are vulnerable to abuse. I further limit the use of KYC for this activity

I totally dislike KYC as a bounty hunter and investors, we have seen so many projects come and go and soon we will see how bad KYC is, and why do they care about genuine bounty hunters when all they want is to reach their softcap to realize their project, let's admit it, there are multiple accounts here but as long as they can do their job effectively promoting ICO I don't see any problem with it.

KYC is good because it can prevent people from using multiple accounts and bots but there is a bad side about requiring KYC in bounty. what if the bounty is a scam? they will sell your info and you won't know that your info is already been used in illegal activities. there are also bounty campaign that don't require KYC at the beginning but at the end of the campaign they change and require it.

I personally doesn't like to have KYC applied for bounty participant.
I just think is unfair, cause what everyone got from bounty isn't so much in number, so there is not so much worth if we do KYC just for bounty participant.

Honestly, for first time I joined a bounty that requires bounty participants to do KYC and it makes me very worried, whether they can keep our data well or not ... if all looks good maybe I will not hesitate to join the bounty that needs KYC

the system probably felt strange to KYC bounty hunter. It is the workers and not the customers for the ICO. However, it is on the other hand like to reduce fraudsters with a double account then this is required. But if to the terms in the identity then for bounty hunter system is less precise.

The use of KYC for Bounty, in my opinion, is a positive value that we can take. Of course, this KYC is used to find out the identity of the Bounty participants, so there is no more cheating. I personally have good experience for KYC, many projects that use KYC, in my opinion, are projects that can be successful. But we are back to the potential of the project you are following.

Actually, I would not recommend it. Because KYC was just needed for those investors that are investing on the ICO project. But with the bounty hunters, they are just a regular employee with the project, and I think it is not necessary.

Declaring mandatory KYC at the end of a bounty campaign is fraudulent in my opinion. It is a deliberate act of trying to deny participants their rewards.

I fully agree that KYC today is a really useful and promising procedure. Because the market has long been in need of additional methods of regulation. Although in any case there is still work to be done to improve this technology, certain disadvantages and risks for users still remain.

After the bounty are over, I see the KYC condition as an injustice to bounty hunters. But if the KYC is specified in bounty thread, I respect

Yes, it is very good to collect the KYC from the bounty participants in order to eliminate multiple accounts and as well as a company should maintain documents if they face problems with the government. Whether they are doing the business in a legit way or not.

i dont like KYC, becouse here is a lot scam projects, and if i send them my private information, ID and so.on - i think with ID and other documentation can make same bad work, for example make KYC on loan website.  its so bad.

say bounty hunters, Reg on web site. and you can check all IP. and if some people use one IP you can delete all of them. + if 1 acc  have 100-200 IP - its mean = IP changer, and you can delete to :)

KYC is last chance.

In fact KYC is done on their platform. If you really want to find bounty cheaters, KYC bounty participants should only end in the hands of the bounty manager or many other ways that can be done without using the KYC system.
Also, KYC is not necessary if their fundraising involves people outside their country because their services will not be enforced throughout the world.

I don't think the bounty needs KYC. Because this will reveal our information. But ico needs it. kyc is a must with the legality of ico.

All of the people who commented here already answered that most of them gonna say no, and I would like to say no for the dozen times. Just imagine, even if the bounty hunters must KYC, but pro abusers just take an ID card and fake them all.

I don't actually join in any bounty campaign that requires your KYC it's a hassle work to update your personal information, I really hate . In the other side it's a necessary move to implement due to abuse from bounty hunters.

i feel you man . i do also hate kyc because its a hassel . what i do is i only skip the bounty or an airdrop with kyc so that my efforts wont be wasted .



kyc is not implemented to bust abusers because theres another more important reason on why we have a kyc now  .

aside from that . kyc is also kinda bit risky if you will give your information to a scam project because they can use it to abuse other service or people .

kyc isnt bad at all only if you confirm that the bounty/airdrops are 100% verified  . i also notice that kyc supported projects are more profitable than those who dont have a kyc . they increase the rewards because they know that kyc is a risky and hassel thing to do  .

For me KYC is not good for bounties hunters but for all investors only that are holding a big amount of cryptos  because bounties hunter are small holders and there is no reason that they need to take KYC to join bounties.

KYC doesn't solve the problem of multi-accounts in the bounty, but it will add difficulties for bounty hunters. For many projects, introducing a KYC at the end of the project is another reason didn't  pay to  the hunters for thear work. For me to pass the KYC is a problem because  I'm from Ukraine and I  haven't an international passport. That is very disappointing me after many months of long work in the bounty campaign.

Like there are many facing the same situation while uploading their documents for KYC, most of the bounty hunters don't have a passport for KYC verification. If Passport is not submitted the verification team is rejecting the document and many people losing their coin after they work for more than 3 months.

Personally, I am convinced that we are getting a truly effective way to protect ICO investors from fraud and the loss of their money. Such a tool can be very useful for many bounty hunters. But you need to understand that the technology is relatively new, so it must be improved, with the elimination of existing shortcomings.

I am now really convinced that ICO projects that implements KYC for the distribution of bounty hunters was a way to exclude a lot of participants. I said that because some credible projects just need your info and not your documents like passport to pass the KYC. They just need to verify that you are not on those banned ICO countries.

It's no secret that documents for KYC  can be bought. If there is a demand for a product, then there is a market with proposals for this product. I have experience. In one project, my documents were not approved after the end of the bounty program. I went to the trick, I turned to the  manager in the ICO group. After writing that I could not pass the KYC and accordingly I could not take part in the investment. My KYC was confirmed In the same day!

I agree about the kyc because it will avoid the abuse of the bounty hunter in the bounties because some of people in the forum cheats that's why some of project is required the KYC to be fair who work their task fairly.

Yes, but we don't have any choice after participating we need to follow their rules and regulation in order to get our bounty rewards. Now, most of the companies are asking for KYC in order to deliver our rewards otherwise, they are not issuing our tokens.

the only solution for it is read the rules correctly before you apply  . ask for questions if they will implement kyc in the future or not  , so that you wont have a problem  .  many people do fail on this process and that includes me  .   i love to join airdrops before but im not aware about kyc , thats the reason that i dont recieve most of my rewards   .

I don't participate in projects where KYC is initially required. But in every campaign on the topic on   BTT, the manager writes that the project's administration reserves the right to change the terms and conditions of the bounty, saving on the payment for the work of the hunters

I'll compare this in real life bounty hunters.

Some likes to be exposed and recognized by the public as bounty hunters but mostly they don't like to be exposed and recognized. Majority of the people here doesn't agree with KYC implementation for bounty hunters. As for me, the bounty management themselves has their own way of determining the cheaters.

there are fears that KYC can harm your data. You better avoid it if you consider this dangerous for your data. but if you feel safe I recommend continuing.

Even i don't have a very good opinion about the KYC for bounty people but after joining the bounty we have to follow their rules and regulation. otherwise, we won't get payment from them until we qualify the KYC procedure. Nobody doesn't know how securely they will protect our data.

Not much of good to be honest,if you can't pass the KYC you will never receove any rewards so all your effort will be went in vain but it is for the people who want to reduce all the alt accounts and earn more stakes.

We all know that some projects do a kyc for bounty to avoid abusing the bounty like some people who always cheat to get a earnings.

Like restricting alts from their bounties? So if their intention is to restrcit them means then why they don't want to ask at the time of participants? They simply ask while the token distribution takes place.

Exactly, without risk it is impossible to collect the coin because without KYC verification it is impossible to get the coins. After three months of work if we don't qualify we are not going to get the coins, so always try submit the document for getting those coins.

In no way, kyc is good for bounry hunters, not even for the investors. They have no right to get our identity. Simoly neglect those campaign and no bounty campaign will be seen anymore.

Asking bounty hunters for KYC after the campaign is over is a clear sign of dishonesty from the bounty managers or project owners.

If project owners and bounty managers make it clear from the beginning that KYC is required then it is up to the bounty participants whether they are willing to risk sending their ID or not.

i think its not a scam because i often see this kind of strategy whenever i join the airdrops on other external sites  . some project put the status of the kyc ( if they will accept kyc or not )  but some put only n/a or pending on thier status  . i dont usually join this kind of projects because im afraid that they will require kyc at the middle or at the end of the campaign and worst thing is that i dont have a vaid id's to do a kyc .

I would never send my KYC to anybody. I do not participate in bounties, maybe on day I will but will never participate in one that had KYC as a prerequisite. I would never send my personal ID to anybody over the net.

Maybe, very reluctantly I might consider sending it to an exchange in order to withdraw FIAT to my bank but other than that I would never consider it because you have no idea what these people will do with your ID after they receive it. They have your bank details and signature, they have your photograph on drivers licence or passport and that is a risk too big too ignore for the hope of receiving freebie-crypto.

The KYC program is very good for reducing the number of account users participating in the prize campaign, but if the bounty hunter uses it if I think it's very unpleasant because my identity is afraid to be used for irresponsible people. KYC for investors, not hunters for prizes ...

Handing over KYC for bounties is a non-starter. It is something not important at all but it is becoming more and more prevalent as an excuse used by bounty managers or project owners in order to withhold bounty and non-payment

Hope they are do that because of positive reason.Because if their reason is like what you said, bounty hunters will mad because reason to not pay them is non sense. But from what i see, when a project told bounty participants to do KYC, some of them follow it and it means they are not have problem with it.

I dont like bounty campaigns that requires kyc to thier bounty hunters, why pass kyc if you will only get 50$ worth of tokens ive pass my kyc in the campaign that i joined but it almost 3 months my kyc is still on pending.

Many bounty hunters have sent KYC and still have not been paid bounties because the project owners and/or bounty managers are scammers.

Maybe they wanted KYC for free by fooling bounty participants just to sell on to criminals.

If that thing happen, we can report them to community and then community can make any judgement for them. Because when people don't believe with a project anymore, it will be very bad thing to them.

well, these are 2 different matters:

- if they state there is no KYC and at the end they change their mind, this is a serious breach of an "agreement" and we can call it a scam. Bounty hunters agreed to do the work with certain conditions as advised, if these conditions change in the end it is a scam

- if KYC is required since the beginning, it will be each person decision to join or not, nevertheless, I don't think KYC for bounty hunters makes any sense. The excuse is generally multi-accounts and bots, but there are countless ways to filter those without KYC(we have examples of that in this forum)...
Bounty hunter is not an investor, so it makes no sense to do KYC (especially because in some cases, the teams are not even known), and will you be spreading your ID on 10-20 projects per year? what are the security measures they use to keep your data safe?
Do you know there are a lot of KYC documents for sale on the dark web?

cheers

This is absolutely correct, lots of KYC documents are on sale by criminals using the internet.

if the campaign is really going well, and it has been proven successful with sales, maybe there will be no problem we send the KYC form, because it is a suggestion from the team, and there is a reason for them. for example, there are some from certain countries that can participate, or conditions for claiming payments that we make, so they think we are truly professional in doing work.

Seems like abusing bounty campaign being a culture in this forum, but we can see some people who try to find them in an unexpected way. You can see at reputation thread some bounty hunters who did abusing bounty campaign and they will get negative trust from DT member. So, the issue for reducing member through KYC is usesless for me. Eventually, I'm not agree with bounty campaign that need kyc to join with, it just will make my identity be used by them as illegal activity or other thing that will make me uncomfortable.

Yes.

It is a sad fact, scammers are selling KYC to criminals.

even multi-account is not allowed but when a project can reach more people with those accounts, it doesn't matter who handles those accounts as long as it gives a big impact to a project marketing.

Yeah, sometimes like that. We have done KYC process but we got nothing valuable because it's just a shit tokens and well, they can sell our identity to other's party and make money.

Getting useless and worthless tokens in return for participating in bounties is one thing but having your KYC ID sold on to third parties is more of a massive concern.

The last signature campaign ive participated  requires kyc, i provided documents and still pending for almost 3 weeks, and its not clear if we will recieve the bounty cause no one is answering thier telegram group.

sometimes bounty hunters are very lazy if there is an ico program that uses KYC, if it is only for investors, in my opinion, what I am afraid of is that there are irresponsible people who use bad methods to deceive people with our data already on record, my suggestion is that KYC must be deleted

All the signs suggest they are scammers.

They really should have been in touch with you by now but their silence speaks volumes.

Most likely the project does not raise a good amount of money, we should know if we are participating in a good project or not, because good project usually pays their bounty hunters, it doesn't matter if it's delayed as long as they will pay.
The bad part is if they will require you KYC when they are not actively answering queries, we should not trust them.

Exactly. If they cannot be bothered to even answer questions or remain active in other ways then there is no need to trust any project.

In the end they need bounty participants to promote projects therefore they should always ensure to take steps that do not alienate bounty participants.

That's why before they do a bounty make sure they added a details will the project need a KYC or NO. Doing a KYC in a last minute is considered a scam attempt for the bounty hunters an excuse not to distribute. That's why I don't like participating in a bounty that need your verification to participate.

I agree. All those that ask for bounty at the last minute are not worth trusting.

Since bounty participants give their time in the bounty they should check and verify all details to ensure the bounty program is real and that they will receive their bounty.

For me doing kyc in bounties is not good. Ive participated 5 bounty that requires kyc, gave all the documents they want  waited  1 months to get approve , waited 15 days for distribution but in the end the project is a scam. With all the effort youve made to pass kyc you wont get nothing in return.

KYC for bounty hunters is should be not needed for some reason unless the campaign feels that some are trying to exploit  that's the time they're going to implement it. Doing a KYC is a hassle to do and not guarantee your account will be verify.

When i see something like that, it actually extend bounty reward too. My friend feel that thing when he join bounty campaign, and almost time for distribution, he should do KYC and devs team said need more time to check participant's KYC first and delay distribution.  ;D

What happened to you is sadly very wrong but getting more and more common. I feel sorry for you.

People need to understand that just because bounty managers ask for KYC it does not mean they are genuine and does not mean they are working for genuine projects.

In the end bounty hunters wasted their time promoting a scam and gave up their personal identification and documents in the process which could not be offered for sale to criminals.

There are some advantage for the legit bounty hunters if a project has KYC because no alts will receive rewards so based on calculation the remaining participants will be divided with total allocations but have more risks than benefits,our valuable information is on the hands of someone and we need to trust them that they won't abuse it.

I have seen different opinions on this issue. But now I am convinced that there is nothing wrong with KYC technology for the market and users. It is so important to be confident in the legality and honesty of the proposed project - in this way it will be possible to provide important advantages for investors and bounty hunters.

That might be true but what does not help is the number of projects which ask for KYC after the bounty has ended - to use as an excuse to scam bounty participants.

yes that may seem inapropriate anymore  to request for a kyc after a bounty has ended but who knows ? maybe this is the stategy of ther bounties to be able to combat abusers ?  if you have the valid i.d's required for a kyc then dont hesitate to do a kyc as long as you are confident that the bounty that you'v joined is real or you may want to give them a free advertising didnt you ?

Now many projects are beginning to require the passage of KYC. I see that the majority of bounty hunters have no desire to go through, although some calmly relate to this. I pass KYC only when I am confident in the project.

The result will be same een if they asked for KYC after the bounty ended that there will be no rewards,all our efforts went into vain with our personal information as well.Personally I am not comfortable to give it to anyone but it changes with different individuals.

Yes youre right almost all bounty campaign and airdrops ask for kyc in order to get your reward. I dont like kyc thats why ive join in a bounty campaign that doesnt require it  cause i have experience in bounties that requires kyc and waited for more than six months but didnt get anything.

KYC as much as possible is required only for the investors only not for the bounty hunters.
Its really annoying actually if some of the bounty campaign will not announce about the Kyc then
in the end of the project, at once they will announce that bounty hunters need to submit kyc without giving any
information from the beginning of the project. And worst sometimes, for us to get the rewards we can't able to receive the token
because their kyc has been disapproved which is too unfair,.

There's numbers of airdrops and bounty campaigns who required Hunters to provide KYC, claiming to protect the project from abuser so it's now then being asked after or some before the campaigns started, it's the hunters own will whether to join or not to this kind of requirements,.

I totally disagree with kyc for the bounty hunters and I must say that it is not proper but some project dev or team does not understand the purpose of kyc that is compulsory mainly for the people that are investing $500 and upwards.

I sympathise with bounty participants who suffer when project owners ask for KYC after the work has been completed. That is just them abusing their power because they control the situation and it is an excuse for them to keep hold of the bounty.

With the formation of the IEO. I think the market trend is going into a higher concentration. Implementing IEO and KYC is a form. Not only about projects, but exchanges like Latoken or Idax also target KYC for traders. In addition, 2018 - a real year of crisis with countless scam projects. KYC may not be a question button but it has space to create assurance. At least that's what I feel.

Yes, we should always follow their channels in order to get an update about their progress, Of course, most of the bounties don't have any real product. Even sometimes it is impossible for bounty promoter to find out the best one because, in the beginning, it is impossible to find the best one for getting the payment from the company.