Bitcoin Forum

TerraGreen is about to pull a KYC-Scam and refuse payments to all bounty participants which won’t pass their afterwards introduced KYC. When TerraGreen launched their bounty, they wrote that KYC is not required to receive rewards. Now, after TerraGreen bounty has ended and before paying rewards, TerraGreen made an announcement, that KYC is suddenly required due to regulatory reasons:

(As far as I know this is only the bounty manager and he's not related to the team)

Proof that KYC wasn’t required while the bounty was running: http://archive.is/HTBvg#selection-955.0-955.7

And it’s still in the title of the topic when I archived it yesterday.  ::)


I consider KYC-Scams as an extremely shady move of a project to save costs when people don’t submit KYC or if the project is a scam to collect personal data and sell it to other scammers on the black market. Assuming that shitcoin ICOs don’t collect much funds right now, the personal data can be worth much more than the collected funds because the scammers can define which data they want to get.
I don’t know if TerraGreen is a scam but the way they put pressure on their bounty participants and refuse them a payment if they don’t pass KYC is at least scamming them.

It can happen that a company has to change some parts of their initial assumptions when legal things change and they get the information that KYC is required for all token holders. Although it’s far too much coincidence that such a change is always happening when the bounty is already finished.  ::) ::)

But that still can happen and I’m ok if TerraGreen pays their participants which don’t want to send KYC for receiving rewards (because it wasn’t required when they joined) with BTC or ETH instead. That would show that it’s really a coincidence and the intention of TerraGreen wasn’t to scam bounty participants and just to save costs / collect data.
But after I've asked that in their Telegram they denied even payments in BTC or ETH instead. That’s a clear abuse to me and I will give them a negative trust. Proof:

https://i.imgur.com/Wj5WUJ3.jpg


Profile link of the accused user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2422222
Bounty thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127694.msg50440871#msg50440871


I’ve not flagged them yet but I hope that a participant will bring up a scammer flag for violating a written contract because I can’t do that, I’m not a participant in their bounty.
The only thing I could do would be to create a Newbie flag which is less effective, so I’ll wait if someone creates a scammer flag. Tagged for now.


Update:

User Aveatrex (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=950474) has confirmed to be an participant of their bounty here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5163466.msg51820156#msg51820156) and has created a flag against terragreen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2422222): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=454

If you agree to the points mentioned in this topic, it would be nice if you can support the flag.

In most bounty threads it is stated that the bounty rules can change at any time.

Thus, it would not be violating any written contract.

Moreover, while in some cases it is a shady KYC scam as you say, it also can happen that they are not allowed to do the payout by their compliance team. This has happened before and is a real possibility.

I agree that the bounty participants shoudn't be the one bearing the cost of that, but it is a reality.

Best case would be that all bounties require KYC. No disappointment possible this way.


Here the main issue, as you highlight it, is the fact they wait for the bounty to be over to disclose the information.
The surely knew about it sooner, but decided to postpone to avoid loosing advertisement.

While I don't like it, it it not enough for me to support any scam accusation against them. Only solid proof of when that information was brought to the BM attention, or the proof that there is no such thing as the audit mentioned would make me flag/tag them.


You don't need to be the victim of the violation to create the flag.

This practice by ICO teams has been going on for a while now and this is also one reason why I stopped doing bounties.

Bounties like terragreen are hiding behind their "the has the right to change the rule as they see fit" policy. They don't disclose the KYC requirement at the beginning because many are not willing to disclose their personal info just to receive bounty rewards worth a few dollars.

I like the term KYC-scams btw.


EDIT:
It appears hunters have the option to sell their bounty stakes for ETH on an exchange. Those who bought those stakes will have to undergo KYC also before they can convert the stakes into tokens.

They deserve a scam tag and flag(i will support the flag in any way)
This is just ridiculous. Why did they have to wait upto the end of the bounty to impose KYC?

Most people don't love to disclose their IDs over tokens and so when they see a campaign requiring KYC, they avoid it.
There is no excuse about changing terms and conditions at anytime here.

Funny of you to say since you didn't make any of those.

Disclaimer: I do believe they are scamming and deserve the tags. I am only pointing out the lack of evidence here "devil's advocate"

That's true but exactly this statement is used for them to "justify" their KYC-scam. They are adding that to their rules while they already know that they will change it after the bounty to save expenses.

In that case it's very clear because they said that all tokens of users who won't pass KYC will be used for advertising campaigns in the future. The reasons for shitcoin issuers to make a KYC scam is:
- get more participants
- scam them later to save parts of the bounty allocation
- (and maybe to get personal data to sell them for making more money if the shitcoin project is a scam)


That can happen, of course. Like I said in my OP I understand it that things can change and they are not allowed to issue their tokens to holders without KYC. But if that's the case they have to keep the promise to pay their participants without KYC. They can pay easily in ETH or in BTC if they can't pay in their tokens.
I asked that in their Telegram and they have refused it to pay them otherwise. That shows how their real intention was: saving costs, not regulatory reasons.

KYC scams are always shady because it's a tactic that we can see quite often nowadays. Important is to have a proof that:

- KYC was not required while the bounty was running
- KYC is required after bounty
- The team refuses also payments in BTC or ETH as compensation

=> there's a clear intention to scam and users dealing with that people are at high risk to lose their payouts they have to receive.  



KYC for bounty is at least useless but in most cases also dangerous.

Why dangerous?
We all know that around 95% of all shitcoin ICOs are scam. And if users are forced to give them their personal data for a few useless shitcoins the possibility to get scammed is very high. I can imagine that there are only Shitcoin ICOs, they don't plan to collect funds. They plan to collect personal data from bounty participants. And enforcing KYC afterwards while denying greedy shitcoin hunters to give them their tokens will lead them to do KYC. Shitcoin hunters are greedy and shitcoin scammers know that.

Besides from that, personal data will rise in value because the real scammers will purchase them on the black market to pass it on exchanges for real money laundering. KYC sounds effective? It isn't, it's quite the opposite and further, it's a risk for legit users.

Why useless?
It's useless because it's another question if KYCs for bounty hunters even make sense. KYC is supposed to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Is it possible to launder money via bounty? - no
Are bounty participants terrorists - I would say no although their comments are sometimes a bit strange.  ;)
In addition, the amount of money generated in bounties is so tiny, bounties for terrorists would be a good measure to prevent them from collecting money at least halfways effectively.  ;)

The solution is quite simple:
The team has to announce the rules clearly before they start. Or they should pay directly in BTC instead of their useless shitcoins but that would cost them "real" crypto.

But of course, if they want to save cost and pull a KYC-scam / collect personal data, the strategy of TerraGreen is the way to go.

I know, nobody is forced to participate in shitcoin bouties. But we have to step in here where cheaters, scammers or other shady people try to damage other users, take advantage from it and fill their own pockets. Scammers should know that they can't do their shit without getting trouble for it.



I don't know how it should be more obvious that they are refusing payments even in other cryptocurrencies, not their tokens.



Source?
As far as I know I have to be affected for flags 2 and 3. Only a Newbie flag is also allowed when I'm not affected.

---

I guess he's not affected, so he can't create a flag 2 or 3.

---

Exactly that, they are using it as a strategy.  :D

I don't know it exactly, I would guess that's only possible if you receive the bounty stakes in your wallet. And for doing so, you need to pass KYC. I can ask a participant if you want, I had a few PMs but he's afraid to create a flagg because he fears that the team will disqualify him.

---

100% agreed here. There are still ( :P) some people protecting their privacy (which is a valuable good) and if I join a bounty without KYC I have to be paid without KYC and not being blackmailed to send my personal documents to receive a bunch of lousy shitcoins. KYC for shitcoin bounties is encouraging scam and identity theft.

All of this ex-post-fuckyou KYC BS is just that--bullshit.  And none of it surprises me.  What does surprise me is how many people do so much work for these scumbags when so many projects have ultimately screwed over their bounty participants.

Yep.  Yep x 1000.  There should be no fuck-you surprises at the end or at any point during the bounty whereby KYC rules are implemented when they were not at the beginning.  That's unfair at best and is a means to scam bounty hunters at worst.

Definitely.  I'm not a bounty hunter, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be paid in some shitty token that'll be worthless within weeks.  That's another thing that surprises me about bounty hunters.

They partnered with this exchange called Tokpie where hunters can trade their weekly/monthly stakes for eth while the bounty is ongoing. That's one option they can do to avoid KYC and still be rewarded (in eth). Those who bought the stakes can then convert it to TGN upon distribution. Anyway, their admin (terragreen) said those buyers aren't required to undergo KYC.

This is starting to look like a standard practice for a lot of teams stiffing bounty workers. I looked over the bounty post, the only thing that I saw coming close to the terms stating they are subject to change is this:

"6. Information about the bounty can be subject to change by the project team, at their discretion."

This is very poorly worded. Considering these people are using an insufficiently written contract to try to fuck their contributors, I would say it is quite justified that same poorly written contract be interpreted to the letter, and that means they did not disclose CONTRACT TERMS were subject to change. I would say a flag for this case is more than justified. I would also suggest bounty workers start archiving and getting explicit statements from project managers from now on before starting work, as well as verifying that those terms are not subject to change. I would also oppose the flag if the project team made good on their bounty obligations, but I am not holding my breath.

I agree with this.

Since they don't pay out their bounties in another currency, this is an obvious scam to me.

We can't verify whether they really need to perform KYC to pay out their tokens. But if this is the case, payment in another currency is a must.
The participants did their work, and deserve their payment.


So, it is either a scam to pay less than they should or a scam to gather personal information. Or maybe both.
IMO this deserves not only a type3 flag, but a type1 flag too.

I personally think that they should be considered to be scams, period. And they should be held to the same scrutiny as any other scam involving a blatant breach of contract.

Their interests are clearly in paying users as little funds as possible, as opposed to potentially upholding any sort of formal regulation that need to comply with. Otherwise, they'd be open to paying bounty participants in terms of BTC, or any fiat, since that would DEFINITELY not be a breach of any securities laws (from their perspective, they'd just be paying for a service with a currency).

But they're not open to that option, which also indirectly shows their own lack of trust within their own project.

I'm not sure why people don't demand funds to be escrowed in bounty campaigns the same way they demand sig campaign funds to be escrowed - even if the payment is in the token of the project.

1. My tag would not make any impact since I am not on DT. All I can do is just act as a back up.
2. I never participated in the campaign, so me creating a flag would make no sense IMO. If anyone who participated created it, I will support it

Are you sure how that process is working exactly? We had a few participants in the German local board and that option was mentioned by one of them but only that these conversions to ETH mean that someone has to buy these shitcoin bounty stakes (LOL, honestly, which idiot will buy that??  :D :D) and surprise surprise, the option doesn't really work because there are no buyers / the orders are ridiculously low if there are any...

Sounds like a "shift the shit to another person" strategy at best.  :D

I'll shoot the users from the German local board a PM again to check this and if all doubts are cleared I'll create a Newbie flag. Unfortunately they are afraid to create a scammer flag because they are feared to get disqualified...
One of them agreed to do it after the payouts (July 17).

---

Yes, that would be another great option to prevent unfair moves like from TerraGreen.


Furthermore, it looks like the Devs aren't interested in solving that issue similar to the Livecoin disaster. Sometimes it's so easy to pay honestly but they choose to go the hard way...  ::)
No response from them here, always the same comments on Telegram...
And the best part: they were advertising "NO KYC" in the headline of their bounty campaign.  ::)
[BOUNTY ROUND 4] ETH instantly+TerraGreen coin[NO KYC/4.6 icobench/MVP][ENDED] (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127694.0)

I haven't use that exchange yet (Tokpie), I only read that feature on their site. As you noted, hunters will still have an issue if there are no buyers or if buy orders are very low. Has any of the participants created a flag yet?

I also already considered creating a type1 flag, but we shouldn't do this.

Upon creating a type2 or #3 flag, the following has to be confirmed:


Creating a type1 flag now, would cover this incident.
And since a type2 / type3 flag is 'more severe' i would actually wait for someone to create such a flag, to support it.




Getting disqualified because of that would just be another red flag :D and would IMO justify a second (type 1) flag.
Does everyone participating there want to send their ID and other personal documents to them ? Is there not a single one who doesn't want to sell his identity for a few bucks  ???

Yes their was a trading on this coin from start of the bounty and lot of users have bought and sold their stakes in that site. So i think the tokpie site is genuine but cannot say about TGN token project about it.

Thanks for the heads up. I agree, it would be better to wait for someone creating a flag type 3. I PMed some users again if they are willing to create a flag from an alt to protect their main.

But I don't know if that's allowed to create a flag from your alt while your main was scammed. Would you consider that as ok? The only reason is to protect the main from damages like deletion of stakes or doxing because they have the personal data and it's linked to the account.

In their Telegram are some of them complaining and mentioning the Scam Accusation on Bitcointalk but I'm surprised that they don't create a flag. I PMed two of them (I guess shitposters). The first one don't know anything about flags and the second one never replied.

Most of those users don't even know about the scam accusations board or the use of the flag.
They are usually locked up in the bounties section making weekly social media reports. I really appreciate what you have tried to do and i do hope one of the comes up here and creates a flag.

Many have been scammed off in this manner and all they do is complain in the telegram group for months after which they have just gone quiet without reporting anywhere or in the forum.

As far as i understand, this forum does not necessarily distinguish between different accounts.

For example:
1) If one account scams, all known alts will get tagged.
2) Being banned does not mean the account, but the person is banned.

Therefore i would say if an alt creates a flag and some reputable and trusted member does confirm that the alt does belong to an damaged user, it should be fine.

I, for example, trust you. So if you confirm that the alt is from someone who was damaged, i trust that statement and therefore can support that flag in all conscience.


However, i'd still like to hear the opinion from others regarding this topic.

I agree, especially if the use of the main account could lead to damages when the team refuses to pay that account or they have already the personal data and there's a high risk of getting doxed when the main account is known.

Same here, if there's another confirmation of an user on DT1 I would ask the KYC-scammed user to create a flag from his alt.

I have participated in their signature campaign 1 or 2 weeks and I choose to transfer 50% to tokpie so I can convert them to ETH.Now I can't find the way to sell them anymore and impossible to get the tokens without passing KYC.This is a total rip-off, if anyone makes a flag I'll definitely support it. (Or I should be the one who makes it?)



I certainly understand your point of view and I agree with you in some points , but unfortunately not all bounty hunters have the chance to get a place in a bounty campaign that pays BTC or a genuine coin.

I can do it as I don't care about being disqualified at this point... But I'd like to hear some more DT opinions first like you both said.

If you have participated in it, and have to pass KYC now (which everyone has to do), you are allowed to create a flag type 3 (violated written contract) against them.




The DT1 point of view was regarding using an alt account to create a flag.
While this should be allowed (imo) if proven member can confirm that the alt belongs to a user who wants to protect his privacy, we are not sure on that.

You - as an directly affected user - are definitely allowed to create a flag since it would be completely justified and i will happily support it if you do.

For reference I'm posting proofs that I have participated in TerraGreen campaign.

---

Quoted from my personal messages (giving permission to transfer stakes to tokpie)

---

https://ibb.co/8DqxhK5 (https://ibb.co/8DqxhK5)
https://ibb.co/W52B0HZ (https://ibb.co/W52B0HZ)

Taken from here: TerraGreen R3 Spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ncay8dF5LZaDVGPiuulvoBIGRFYPWk_v6te-QMep3zs/edit#gid=817376269)

One little question,should I create another topic myself describing the issue or should I just link this one to the flag?

Generally it is advised to create an thread yourself when starting a flag, but since this one here is very well documented and 1miau is a trusted member, it probably would be the best if you simply link to this one.
A second one would either contain not all the information present here, or would be redundant.

I'd say, link to this one and report back once the flag is created. You got my support.

Flag created: Flag (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=454)

Supported.

Let's hope future people who consider participating in bounties from them and/or making business with them otherwise will be cautious when doing so. 

Sad to hear that you got scammed and yes, it's allowed for you to create a scammer flag because you are affected. Great that finally someone from their bounty is responding here and interested to get this problem solved, hopefully. I've supported your flag as well.


Since you have confimed to be affected by their KYC-Scam here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5163466.msg51820156#msg51820156) it's totally fine to link this topic as reference in my opinion.  :)


Yes, let's hope that they will care for their reputation here, having the account marked as scammer on Bitcointalk is never a good thing for a project. If they pay their bounty participants honestly in BTC or ETH they can still get the scammer tag removed. It's up to them now.

I created this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5165178.0) in the altcoins discussion board and used the terragreen flag as an example. If you can add more guidelines, please comment.

Great idea to show them that it's indeed possible to put pressure on shitcoin scammers if they try to save costs. If bounty participants would team up after they were scammed to spread negativity about the project and give them bad ratings on Google, FB, Bitcointalk and everywhere, the ICO team would think twice about shady behaviour.
Unfortunately, most bounty hunters feel they have to do everything the "devs" are saying...

I got a notification in my email that I received some TGN tokens at tokpie, which is very strange because I didn't do the KYC  ???. Those who also transferred their stakes to Tokpie please check if you also got the tokens I'm curious why this is happening since judging from their Telegram chat they are still insisting on bounty hunters to do KYC

No, those who bought bounty stakes on Tokpie exchange don't need to upload any documents to get TGN on their tokpie accounts' balances.  Actually, today, all of them have received their TGN.
Tokpie has internal KYC procedure only for those traders who buy/sell on more than $25k.


I strongly against any scam accusation in that case, because:

1. Bounty rules can be changed as was stated in the bounty thread.
2. TerraGreen doesn't request KYC in order to avoid paying to hunters otherwise they didn't prolongate kyc procedure on 10 days. But they prolonged it as hunters requested. Proof: https://t.me/terragreencoin/94433
3.  TerraGreen Team doesn't hide. Core members pass kyc on icobench https://icobench.com/ico/terragreen and icoholder https://icoholder.com/en/terragreen-28096
They would not do that if they were a scam project.
4. Also, i have never seen a scam project that makes so many publications in good media (check media section here: https://terragreen.io/)



It would be a ridiculous situation if a project like TerraGreen gets scam accusation.

Because TGN bounty stakes, being deposited on Tokpie, had become on the second market. Simply saying, Tokpie had passed KYC on TerraGreen so Tokpie users don't need to do it in order to get TGN on their tokpie accounts balances.

1. No it wasn't. "Information regarding the bounty" could be changed. Not the payout terms.

2. This doesn't make sense. What has the time you have to submit your KYC documents to do with the fact that they changed the terms from "NO KYC" (see their title) no "KYC absolutely mandatory" ? Nothing.

3. Sure, because icoholder is so trustworthy  ::) Look at his trust rating and flag (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1206615).

4. Then you either didn't see good scams at all.. or didn't identify them as such.




They already got the scam accusation. And they already received their negative trust rating and a flag (15 supporter including 9 DT and 0 oppositions).
They are labeled as what they are - scammer.


Your poor attempt to defend them failed miserably.
What were you trying to achieve ? Did they pay you 100 shittokens more to do that?

Most likely KYC is required on tokpie if you want to withdraw your funds. Terragreen seems to be somehow related to tokpie / have a partnership. I hope you can move your funds out of tokpie exchange, but I'm in doubt.  :'(


Yes, because you have to do KYC on tokpie. There is no way to get paid without submitting personal documents.


1. That wasn't why I created the scam accusation. The problem is that Terragreen is also refusing payments in BTC or ETH. They claim it wouldn't be allowed for them to send their tokens without KYC (I don't know if it's true, but ok, let's assume they are right (even if they don't have a proof, see how generous I am  :P)). There is exactly no problem to reward them with collected funds instead for their work but Terragreen is refusing that! That's a scam of the worst kind.
2. That doesn't matter, they can prolong it to lifetime it's still requiring KYC to receive rewards.
3. I haven't claimed that the project itself is a scam, but people are at high risk at losing money when dealing with them (like it happened to bounty participants).
4. Read 3. Besides from that 4. isn't true because there are many scam projects faking media publications.


It would be easy for them to fucking PAY all of the users for the work the TerraGreen team received. They can easily use BTC or ETH where no KYC is required, but wait, that would cost them real money, not their worthless shitcoins. It's up to them if they want to have the tag removed.

Hello Real Bounty Hunters,

After Concerning advisors and experts , We found solution for this issue and we will announce it shortly.
We did not intend to hurt real bounty hunters.

‼️IMPORTANT‼️

After concerning Experts and Advisors ,we decided that we will distribute the coin to all participants who are not ready to submit KYC. So now there will not be any problem to any Bounty participants and some participants have raised accusation on btt. so they should now close it. All participants must have to register on Tokpie Exchange before 06 August 2019 to get coins. We will distribute coin on 07 August.

"ALL who did not pass KYC or don't want to pass it CAN GET THEIR COINS on their Tokpie accounts IN FULL and now can SELL them or keep holding. Know how to get your TGN coins: https://tokpie.io/blog/get-terragreen-tgn-coins-on-your-tokpie-account-balance/

Nice to hear that.  :)
I'll wait for confirmations that you paid your bounty participants without KYC (like Aveatrex who created the flag) and remove my negative tag if it's proven.

I appreciate your decision but I'm also wondering if you would have done the same if we hadn't created a scam accusation + flag.  ;)

We did not want to hurt any participants. we can not distribute to those without KYC on TerraGreen wallet. we are going to deactivate account of those who have not submitted KYC within 2 months. So after concerning advisors we found this solution and we will follow it and they will get thier coin on 07 August on Tokpie account and after 07 august we will not distribute to anyone. There should be time limit otherwise we will be distributing for whole year.

Ok and people can withdraw their tokens / tokens converted to ETH/BTC from Tokpie Exchange without KYC? I thought Tokpie has some sort of partnership with you? And what will happen after that 2 month period if someone wants to claim his bounty rewards? If you can please all bounty participants and pay them I see no issues.  :)

I'm wondering why you don't pay directly in ETH/BTC to avoid regulatory issues:

But ok, I appreciate your step into the right direction.

We will deactivate account on TerraGreen not on Tokpie. Participants will get TGN coin in thier Tokpie account and they must have to create account on Tokpie before 07 August 2019. There should be some time limit to finalise campaign otherwise we will be distributing for whole year.
We have already listed TGN on Exmarkets and Tokpie Exchanges with BTC and ETH pair to trade. So they can trade TGN. We have partnership with Tokpie regarding bountystake trading and TGN/ETH pair trading.

Since I transferred 50% of my stakes to tokpie long ago,I received some TGNs in my tokpie balance 2 weeks ago and it seems I can trade/withdraw them freely without passing KYC so that won't be a problem I think.

Only results matter right?  ;)

---

From what I've undertood,they are going to distribute the tokens in users tokpie account because somehow tokpie is able to allow deposit/withdrawals without KYC if the sum is under 2500$ (probably has to do with the regulatory laws in their juridiction), something that TerraGreen can't do apparently.That's indeed a good solution to satisfy everyone :) I'll also remove my support of the flag once it's confirmed that you distributed to everyone as you promised.

Thanks for the clarification. If you have a little bit time you can try to move some funds out, that would be a sufficient proof in my opinion.

Finally we can say that, I hope they keep the promise this time.


Sounds reasonable, I'll do the same once I have the confirmation.

Thank you very much for taking the time and creating the flag. I guess without your help the problem would have gone unnoticed.  ;)

‼️‼️ IMPORTANT : Tomorrow is the last day to get TGN without KYC ‼️‼️
This option is available from July 26 to Aug 07, 2019 23:59 UTC ONLY
👉: https://tokpie.io/blog/get-terragreen-tgn-coins-on-your-tokpie-account-balance/

Hello
All participants who did not want to submit KYC and have registered on Tokpie before 26 July and did not get coin can notify on Telegram @tgncoin to get their coin on Tokpie.
We distributed to all the participants who have registered on Tokpie from 26 August to 09 August.
Please remove support of the red flag who got coin without KYC.

You can send Aveatrex (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=950474) (the user who created the flag) a PM to review the situation. Depending on if he has doubts or not he might remove the entire flag, it's up to him. I didn't follow all the Telegram spam and trust him to make the right decision.  :)

It is not just up to him, but everyone who got scammed has to forgive the act:

Yes, I specified earlier here that All participants who did not want to submit KYC and have registered on Tokpie before 26 July and did not get coin can notify on Telegram @tgncoin or to get their coin on Tokpie.
We distributed to all the participants who have registered on Tokpie from 26 August to 09 August.
So they have to now remove flag or support of the flag.

No, they don't need to.

Please read it again, more carefully:



All supports will be removed once everyone who got scammed forgives you.
If there is at least one person not forgiving you, the flag and support remains valid.

I didn't receive the tokens because I created my tokpie account long ago, messaged you on telegram about it.

I'll wait some confirmation from users that they effectively received their tokens without passing KYC before removing my support from the flag as it's a sufficient proof of your good faith in my opinion, albeit , DT members that supported the flag still need to be convinced in order to remove their support and deactivate their flag.

That's true but it's almost impossible for the flag creator to find it out if everyone who got scammed has forgive the act. It's possible that some people will notice next year that they haven't received the token because when they signed up, their expectation was to get the tokens automatically (which isn't the case finally because rules were changed after the bounty had ended). And some shitcoin projects have huge delays in sending tokens so it's quite normal to wait very long for bounty rewards.
Like if Aveatrex is removing the flag because he feels fine doing it, but somewhen later another user comes over the issue and is noticing that he hasn't received tokens. Then, it's possible that he feels scammed and it's his personal right to create a new scammer flag again.


+1
Waiting a little bit sounds like a good solution and the scammer flag on terragreen's profile will also refer to this topic here. 

I can confirm that I received the entire sum of tokens in tokpie without KYC.Waiting for other affected users to confirm.

A very short update: TerraGreen has fulfilled it's promise and it seems that they they distributed the tokens to participant's tokpie accounts without having to pass KYC. I feel like they have at least figured something out regarding the issue which proves a little bit their good faith towards the the participants.

To all flag supporters, please state your opinion about this, should we all excuse them and give em another chance by removing our support, or you insist on keeping it?