Bitcoin Forum

The decentralized nature of cryptocurrency seems not be effective when it comes to investing in cryptocurrency, seeing that investors in most cases are asked to do KYC, bounty hunters inclusive.

I do not think investors should be compelled or made to do KYC by submitting their personal data and documents, because project initiators do not stand any risk of losing their money. Rather project initiators or developers should be made to do KYC, in order to gain the trust of investors, who want to invest in their projects.

This is necessary because we have seen cases of scam ICOs, which have made investors to lose trust in a lot of them. So to gain the trust back, we would need to know whom we are giving our money to as investors.

Maybe it will not be done.
I used to think like you, I like that.
I like them (the team) should (KYC) information transparency rather than investors.

You are probably right it would be nice to have a system where you can trust the devs up front. But I don't think the devs and project members are going to do KYC willingly. They may force the investors and bounty hunters to do KYC because they are in such a position to ask for whatever they want. My advice is to just avoid any and all campaigns where KYC is needed and you will be fine.

Just like that and just try to tell you endchain as the ico project which all of the team have already proven their identity through KYC verification and it has already verified through some parties. We need the more trusted team like this one and KYC verification looks so important to avoid the scammer.

There are projects that do not ask investors for kyc, such as webspace. Although, some will tell you they are trying to be complaints with certain laws and that it compels them to get kyc done by all participants, both investors and bounty hunters.
This is very common with STOs.
If project team can be made to do kyc, it will make more investors to invest in such project.

Everyone should be careful with these KYC requirement from these ICOs. I just recently saw someone offers their database after the project that they went. It's not just the ICO that they have been selling but their investors itself, the data, information, the ID's. As in everything, they are selling it so you should be careful on choosing what projects to invest with if you want to secure yourself from such type of taking for granted scenarios.

Today, almost all companies require this procedure, but I think in the future, many companies will cancel it because of this they lose a lot of customers, not everyone likes it

it should be like that, both parties must be mutual KYC to avoid cheating by one of them, let alone team members, they should do KYC because these people save investors' funds. what is feared is theft or misuse of investor funds

I don't think KYC is a bad procedure for a project or investors, rather it is needed for everyone. As you mentioned, the project owner needs to verify KYC first, I do agree with you! Every regulated project like STO has this system! At this moment, people lost every hope from the ICO, if ICO project owners go with a live KYC procedure, then people can trust them again!

Such a policy is indeed enough to eliminate decentralization rather than cryptocurrency but we cannot say that cryptocurrency is not decentralized, it differs from crypto properties because it is for ICO and project continuity but after that everything will be decentralized because cypto decentralization is a cheap, transparent and non-existent transaction who set it up

I perfectly agree with you. We need to know the real identity of anyone who owns an ICO project so that in case they want to abscond with investors funds, they can easily be apprehended.

It all depends on how much the level of fraudulent ICOs will be reduced, since the main problem at the moment is more than the number of fraudulent ICOS and therefore it is very dangerous to pass the KYC.

This is what makes me afraid with KYC procedure. For bounty/airdrop cases, sometimes after giving KYC to a project, the project looks like not really active to the community. The team members are rather difficult to contact. Moreover, for bounty/airdrop hunters just got a little profit from the project. KYC procedure is too risky, and the profits are not in accordance with the risk. I think it is the reason to refuse KYC procedure for bounty/airdrop with less profitable.

Bounty hunting doesn't have a secured profit through hunting projects and joining the program that they offer.

That's not an easy thing that everyone has been thinking of until now. Most of them are very sketchy and shady to the point you mentioned they rarely communicate with the people that they have been with. It's really hard to assess if you're in the middle of thinking and decides if you'll follow the KYC or not.

I don't think it is necessary to be KYC for an ICO Team, if to prove they are genuine they just need to make an introductory video about themselves, I think that is much better

It's true and I really agree with your idea, because with KYC we can easily track and analyze the people behind the project, whether real or not. Even better if the funds from ico do not hold directly by the developer, but are held by escrow services, this is to prevent losses if ico becomes a scam.

ICO with KYC can avoid fraud, but this will no longer be anonymous but can find a good solution if undesirable things happen.
All of this also depends on project policy for the better.

It could be but the problem is that this is a free market, those ICO that pops around can do anything, but the thing is that this community has exposed a lot of them specially nameless and faceless project, and I don't think they are willing to do KYC, and that is the sad part.

For those investors who have been ask for a KYC, my simply answer is that if you're not comfortable sharing your information then skip and look for other projects that don't enforce this KYC thingy.

I like that idea in asking the team to do a KYC, but it will need some trusted 3rd party involvement to collect all those KYC data, that way should be able to minimize any possibilities for people to make some scam project.

Of course, the test, which is much larger than the KYC, must be passed in front of the relevant state bodies by the members of the ICO team, since fraudsters are often ICO teams rather than investors. We have statistics that more than half of all ICO projects are now scammers. Are there any data how many investors tried to launder dirty money by investing in ICO projects? It seems to me that the effectiveness of this venture is almost zero. This is one of the methods to discourage the population from using cryptocurrency.
On the other hand, we know that KYC testing is only for investors, not for bounty hunters, demanded by the United States and China. At the same time, we do not know what form they need to do. Maybe it’s enough just to warn investors that the ICO project is not for citizens of these countries. After all, in the end, it is for them to decide whether this event is risky or not.
 And with regard to bounty hunters, checking KYC is generally illegal, because no one is demanding such testing against us.

Most likely you are right, in order to see and interest investors the organizers themselves need to pass KYC!

I think that KYC is not dependent on the project team, they are forced to do so, it is not their fault. KYC's work so they can confirm that investors are not from countries that forbid their people from joining the ICO

ICO teams need more extensive checks than KYC checks and should be carried out by government agencies on the basis of specific laws or regulations. I think that soon it will be, many states have already developed or are developing relevant regulatory acts to regulate the activities of ICO. We need clear rules of the game and clear rights and obligations of ICO participants. States can not long stand apart from numerous frauds in this type of activity.

I don' think you guys get it, it is a wrong assumption to think developers want to go through the hassle of spending money collecting investors data and verifying it, this wasn't so before until the SEC comes out with their DAO report which brought about the verification of investors identity. No developer wants SEC to come after him or her because it is bad for business.

Agree that,they also need to do but already they are giving all their personal data on the website where they are selling their tokens but if that is scam ICO the details will be fake so you need to verify the documents about the team before investing on it.

I think they are not forced upon you at all. I mean yeah there are some projects that require those things but they are not forcing you to join them, so if you see KYC in some funding than don't put your money in those things.

However, it is good and cool for projects to do that because it shows they are legit and really taking this seriously, I have seen in my time ICO's that was so much scam that the "team members" section was the same guy with fake mustache and all that and also seen one ICO where after it was funded dude changed the website to say "penis" and that's it, all money was gone. So, when you have these professional people who require KYC and so forth to go along with the government and register there you know they are a decent company to say the least.

This is one of the greatest idea I ever read. If i only have a merit, i will give you some for sure. I am totally agree with this and we should know better about those ICO team members to be sure that we are dealing with the correct people and not just a stolen identity. ICO nowadays and on 2017 was very alarming where investors were being a victim of money and indentity theft. I hope that there will be a government agency that will handle KYC procedures for ICO team members.

Correct to say,as how many projects it was a Scam and if the check would be the project inventory would not risk their money,but the opposite turns out that the investor besides the fact that risking his money and still needs to pass the test of authenticity that he is a real person?!Just absurd,but everything is done for total control of people just

For me KYC is important for investors to buy ICO and from anywhere in the country because some countries are also banned so there is nothing wrong with the team doing that.

What they need is regulation for the entire project, its team, members, and developers. In order to make the crypto investment a good place to spend your money with profit. That makes sense, KYC for Customers.

I think this is a good suggestion and a welcome development for the salvation of the cryptocurrency investors community from continuous scam activities,if project initiators could carry out KYC it would go a long way to check the crypto community from fraudulent activities

This is a good point from the OP and I agree with that. It has now got to a stage, where we now need to start ensuring that the team of a project is first verified.
ICObench does that to the team of the projects that list on their site and I think there are some ICO listing sites who are also into that.
There are also certain projects that do not ask for jkyc from investors, because it is not necessary.

You god damn right ;D ICOs try to rise so much money and in most cases we can't even be sure that the team is real and legit. Doesn't it look strange? There are dozens of options how project's founders can cheat their clients, but only investors should go through KYC. It's insane.

I totally agree. I have long argued that the ICO process needs a clear control of the state. He did not fulfill the road map on time-a fine,did not pay a bounty-a fine. Repeated violation can be punished by prison. And of course, the founders of the ICO should be fully tested by the state authorities.

That is so true I have seen so many scams ICO photoshopped their team to make them appear part of the team fortunately for us they are caught, it's the team or people behind the project that really needs KYC to prove to the community that they are real people and not the other way around.

It should be done both ways. If they require their investors and bounty hunters to do a KYC check then they themselves should go through the same process by a reputable company and who can inform everyone that the team have passed KYC

I agree with that because not only investors and bounty hunters are required to verify themselves but the team must do it so that fraud can be minimized because if it is implemented, the team will not dare to cheat, the reason is because their personal data is known and every ICO must pass the regulations first so the scam can be completely destroyed

Yeah, that's a good idea. I have repeatedly passed the KYC procedure and I was always wondering why the project team needs to know their investors. The main thing is that they bring money to the project. But the team would do well to provide their data to us so that we were sure that they serious. Then the cases of fraud would also be reduced.

Well, I think it's not fair that some of the people pass kyc and the other person can not pass , I think all people have to pass kyc to be fair and it will reduce the Scam in the projects

what you said was true, the developer and initiator of ICO project in thruth was the most needed to undergo a throughout KYC procedure to minimize the chance of ICO become a quit scam.
with the team reveal their true identity to public it also raise the project credibility.
peope will trust the project more if the team not an anonymous person who use a fake identity in their site.

If an ICO wants to succeed then they must first have a strong founder and team dev, in addition to their profile they need KYC to gain trust from investors. ICO projects with an anonymous team or team no KYC, I think those projects are scam and it is very difficult to succeed

And that is why ICOBench started with checking IDs of teams. You can find the green or red button on every listed ICO. Green means that team is successfully verified, red means that they didn´t pass the KYC process.

This is actually very influential in the future how the project works. If the team has been verified, of course it's very good. And just see how the project develops. With the verification team already done, of course scam projects will never be there again.

of course, I often see on one of the ICO Rating websites, ICO Bench, in the information displayed on the website I see that only one or two people submit their KYC documents for the legality of a project they are handling, even though in my opinion everyone is responsible answer and appear on the Website or WP must submit their KYC documents on ICO Bench. to better convince investors.

some projects require KYC to be able to accept their investment and with KYC you can get the results of the money you use to invest in the project, but from KYC there will usually be crime and it will make your identity known to many people, so You must be careful when you want to invest and do KYC.

investors have little or no role to play in the possession of kyc of participants of a particular initial currency offering or any other project that deems it fit to materialise their vision. The team has loads of regulations watching them and also some stringent rules they have to abide by and so many things behind the investors and participants eyes.

Manipulations with KYS are already becoming widespread. Perhaps there is a need to try to use a multifactor check, although not the most convenient and fast, but without passport data. Developers do not try too hard to compromise on the security of personal data.

The problem is that until the end we are not sure if the project is real or is a scam. Unfortunately, if we want to invest in ICO or participate in bounty programs, we have to take a risk because developers need to require verification of KYC from the fact that legal regulations are applied.

Im totally agree with your Thread and its timely. Because as we see lots of scam ICO's that still wreaking havoc on the ICO Market and degrading the trust and confidence of  Investors and those honest project also suffering due to these bad actions of the few scambugs and this must be stop!

I think that if honest developers request a KYC check, this means that their project has some plans either for investors from the USA or the project will enter the US market. I believe that such a verification means that the project has big plans. Either the project is a scam  ;D ;D ;D

I totally agree with you...team members have to pass KYC and prove their identity an real role in project to gain investors trust.

I am just wandering that if ICOBench truly ensure that teams are verified and their true identities are well documented, then that should have limited the number of scam projects in the space.
I just have this feeling that some teams make use of stole identifies for their kyc with ICO listing sites. This is why investors and bounty hunters need to be more careful with their personal documents.

KYC is asking by many new crypto projects because they want to eliminate the investor from that country where ICO Investments are restricted. But as you said this can cause our identity to be in the wrong hands so we need to be very cautious while investing and crypto projects with KYC procedure and only invest when you know that the project is legitimate and have much reputation.

This one is a very nice post. They should stop asking investors for KYC. The projected team are the ones that need to do the KYC in order for the Investors to know who they entrust their funds to.

You have a good point there. This post needs to be well rewarded. Project team are the ones that need to be screened by the Investors and not the other way round. It's just like entering a boutique to buy some clothing and am mandated to present an ID. I mean, that's quite odd.

Absolutely, teams behind project needs kyc more than investors, it is important to know if team handling a project has good reputation or not, without this it is always easy for some team to run away with money donated by investors.

It is fair to say that for the trust and tranquility of the investor to the projects it is not enough just the photos of the developers on the site. Organizers are required to provide accurate information about themselves with all the necessary contacts to communicate, otherwise fraud with the ICO will only increase

Yes, now the situation with ICO projects is kind of very strange. In order for investors to give their money to strangers, they also provide their confidential data and copies of the documents required absolutely arbitrarily. At the same time, the ICO teams receiving this do not themselves pass any KYC checks and in many cases turn out to be scammers.
ICO teams must be tested in front of the relevant government agencies that must monitor this process in order to prevent fraud in this type of activity. Hope this will be soon.

This was the case of Initial Public Offering(IPO) before ICOs came to push them in, most IPOs register their details before collecting money from investors and that is why investors could rely on an IPO investment when it comes with investing but when ever since ICO came with their mouthwatering opportunities and benefits that made many investors abandon the IPO system, they have been major victim of scams by some of these unreliable ICOs but I think this is why STO was introduce which is quite low now in gaining relevance but gradually, it will gain relevance and put a lot of these ICOs to check, so I agree with you that project initiators are the ones that needs KYC and not the investors

Of course the project initiator and the team dev need KYC first. If they cannot KYC then they cannot force KYC investors because it is not reasonable. And those projects are usually scam

I don't think it would be cancel rather others would adopt it kyc know your customer is quite useful and helpful
I see it as a security measure

I think if you do KYC it will only have a bad influence on your future because there will definitely be many who know your privacy and can know your identity completely so that it will only make your data easy to recognize and can potentially be used by criminal acts by people you don't know.

I am against going to KYC anywhere, as long as there is no guarantee that my personal data will not be sold to anyone else on the network. I like it better when cryptocurrencies remain anonymous as originally thought.

Cryptocurrency decentralization is a myth. All vriptocurrencies are created by someone and their creators have huge amounts of these coins on their wallets, which they can sell at any time and drop the rate to 0. There are really independent cryptocurrencies and they are not in authority.

Maybe it is a very good idea so we can see the team from the project working in it so we can give confidence to get into the project to invest so that it is less likely to lose our money, if the investor and bounty can be asked KYC, why does the team not do this so we can continue to see the development of the project correctly.

Yes, this is a very odd thing, why should investors who do KYC only for the reason "avoid AML" while the team has more potential to use investor funds for other suspicious activities. Doing KYC in both sides is the best solution to get rid fraud from investor and team itself

I totally agree with OP's idea! KYC for the team members will give some assurance that team is not fake and easy to find if something bad happen on their project. if I remember correctly some ratings site is doing KYC verification for the team members.

It's not myth but the only consensus that truly decentralized is a coin which has used POW system. you must understand about ICOs used pre mined methong that linked to the POS consensus.
you must understand about that first.

This is because of the SEC regulations. Also KYC is used to go against scamming projects with abusing.  So, the only bitcointalk profile equals single KYC. In addition, most projects restrict some countries and KYC is useful in this regard.

Yes they do need it more, but my question is who do they submit it to you the investors or...? Only if there are some team in charge of that and if there is believe me investing might have been so good to people unlike today. I think that's why most people wish there can be governments intervention in crypto.

This is the bitter truth that no one seems to care less about because most of the projects on fire today are without owners. Even up to now, we don't know who Satoshi Nakamoto is so the issue of KYC for project owners is less stress on when you consider how some pioneers didn't expose their identity.
By the way, if that's the case, then I don't think there us a need for KYC at all.

its true, with many scam ICOs around crypto market, i think developers team or initiators team need provide identity more than investor because investor is the one who have risk on the project

You are right mate and it has also gotten to the stage now where whitepaper is no longer enough to proof the authenticity of a project, even with white paper with all manner of photos and paid write ups, lots of investors are still being scammed, in as much as I understand that the block chain industry is created for main purpose of decentralization.

I think ICOs should be excluded please and make them go through all manner of necessary legal registrations before they can promote their ICOs and that can only happen if many top countries to stop fighting crypto currency and give it a full back up.

What you have said is just the truth, I don't think KYC is needed to be done by the users of the platforms since they use bitcoin in the purchase of this tokens and no fiat, they should leave KYC to exchanges and other companies, and they should be a company that verifies the team behind a projects before they even begin ICO. This should be made compulsory for every member of an ICO project to carry out KYC and including certificate on their website so that we can be able to verify their identity before investing in their project.

You guys didn't even know about what are you talking about, this thread was discussing about KYC will be very suitable to be implemented to the team rather than investors. It's needed to avoid the fraudulent platform and project and that will be important to be applied for developers and creators of ico.

I can't agree more. KYC for bounty hunters is a must to prevent multiple accounts and KYC for the team offering the ICO is also to be considered to be sure that they are real people with real names and real credentials. I also don't like investors being asked for KYC considering they are those who can make the project happen and giving this kind of hassle is somehow shameful.

I agree with you, because the main problem of all scam projects are unverified team members that are always going away with all collected money. I am joining only projects with a legit and verified team members.

I can not agree with you. I consider kyc to be a necessary procedure for all project participants, as previously cases of money laundering through cryptocurrency were noted, and this procedure was introduced precisely for this.