Bitcoin Forum

A lot of alarm has been raised on shit coins which have become a concern to many in the crypto sphere, but i feel our attention should be on the shit developer rather talk about the shit coins. The reason why we have shit coins all over is because the number of shit developers has increased to the maximum, i guess it is time to begin to publish the names of shit developers on the forum in order to do some justice to the crypto sphere.

A new coin could have really great potential, it can even work and have some value by being competitive already. But the problem is the poor management, less of marketing and development, and stupid funds investment can ruin any crypto currency.

Criticizing the product is also criticizing the developer. 


There is already a scam accusation board for developers who plagiarized whitepapers and those who fake their identity. I don't think it is necessary to publish names of poor performing coins which are usually labeled as shit coins. You, OP, may do so if you are really up to it.

but they are the same thing. a shit developer creates a shitcoin.

and the problem is not either of them in my opinion. the problem is the community investing in these shitty projects. if you and i don't buy into the ICO scams, garbage altcoins, fork coins, bitcoin copies, centralized altcions,... then these shitcoins die in their first day instead of staying around for years filling the market with garbage.

You have a good idea and what I can say that most of the shitcoins are coming from shit devs but don't forget also that there are high ranked devs that operates also a shitcoin so we need to be careful as most of the season devs wants an easy money.

Once they will be able to get their shares from the project then they can just leave it and proceed to another project. There are plenty of cases like this, so your solution might help but it cannot fully clean up the shitcoins out there though it can surely help.

I strongly agree that the names of the coin shit developers appear in this forum, so that we are no longer trapped in the projects that he developed, because so many shit coins were born in cryptocurrency

Shitcoin or shit developer but the outcome is same shit project sonits better to avoid all the new project then only this issue will be resolved.But scam projects are more dangerous which could take all your money so exposed scammers can be found on scam accusation but you can't decide a project is decide until it lose its total value.

You, as always, reason correctly. However...
It is known that people seek profit. No matter what kind of tool it is, it is important that you can make money on it. If the investor realizes that this particular asset can be pumped after the purchase, he buys. No crypto-ideologies, only business. And money, as you know, does not smell.
So, question: will we buy into a new promising altcoin?.. And when there is the next wave of newcomers, it will be clean fuel for all this shit.

There is a correlation between them. A shit coin is equal to a shit developers. I think you didn't know it that is why you posted thread like this ;).
Just know what are the shitcoins and do some research on it and find its developers then post it here. In crypto world, there is no such thing as justice ;) especially for those who got scammed by different ICO's.

I think the issue is not about shitcoin of shit dev. If you take a good look at the situation, you will notice that it's better we say shit project.
Why?
Some project them selves contains bunch of shit people. Team, community and more.
So, instead of saying shit coin, dev, team, community, Let's join everything and say Shit project.  ;D

Haha, that's a good idea, where there's a bad coin behind it is a bad team. They mostly only work with names or even fake names and photos to make some shit projects. It's hard if not see their true identity, a good thing now is to make all investors aware, especially those new to stay away from projects with teams and communities is not clear.

It's the same thing, and it's easier to find and know a name of a coin instead of the names of devs who are working on bad coins

And don't forget, maybe a good dev is working on a bad coin and there are other developers working on the same project, you have to consider this before publishing any names

i agree. that is unfortunately correct. people's greed always controls this market. that is why we have so many over hyped and over pumped shitcoins among the top 10 altcoins at the moment even though they are purely garbage projects.
i still haven't lost faith in the market though. i believe that if some day finally we see even 1 good altcoin it will grow easily and without big drops.

I think it boils down to the team, those who are making the project, those who invent and give the idea, and not blame the developers. Developers just code everything based on the requirements of the project, they don't have any idea if this is shit of not.

I don't know if you have been in a software development, but let me tell you that developer just follow what the project wants. It's up to the CEO or some higher management want they want their project to be. Developers have nothing to say at all, they just code, then someone will test it based on the requirements, just saying.

alot of devs are actually already exposed but the number of those so called sh3t coins are still growing with anonymous creators or creator of those coins can use fake names and faces so that they can escape freely and make another sh3t coin again.  you cant totally control or stop them but we can just ignore them , if no one will invest they can just die and be de listed eventually  . problem solved

The telegram is full of crypto groups that follow new projects and take them apart right up to the cog. Here's a good example: the crooks behind the Crypterium project have now created the GramEx exchange. As for me, in mobile messengers more convenient to follow such news than to go to the forum.

i guess about it , has announced already a few years ago, forum not responsible for all scam investments or something like that.
but the good news , u can post some scam project on the forum in Scam Accusations.

Funny as it sounds but that's the reality on ground, however when I see all these worthless or shit coins  what normally comes to mind is the developers behind it, the same is with good coins. But most times, some of these fraudulent developers or team uses fake pictures and identity, thereby publishing their information on the forum might not really produce a good result. Instead I think the best way is to drag their project to this forum for those who aren't aware to be informed, in this way, we will succeed in helping bring down the project while saving potential buyers.

That sounds like a good idea but how do you prove someone is a "s*t developer"? I guess you'll have to gather some real convincing evidences that show he/she is doing things outside of the "accepted standard". Unfortunately, we don't have a well defined standard yet for developers in Crypto world. We could borrow good standards from the professional non-crypto world, combine them with Bitcoin/Blockchain ideals and make every developers adopt the new standard?
Or we could create our own home-grown standard?

Shit developer's and team always give birth to shit coin the two work hand in hand you can't separate them from each other, if a team is legit and focuses on it development then the coin can never be term shit coin any ways.

Many new projects have brilliant ideas implemented into them but since the developers and teams can't lead the project well it ends up a shit project, the problems and faults of every projects is surely from devs and teams, no  matter how promising the project might appear to be only the teams work will decide

Well, to be honest, I would agree if you change to the shit token.

Creating a token more easily than creating a coin, some of the projects only doing copy-paste for the code and distribute the token with using an airdrop. Then try to make a hype to sell his own token, In the past years, i found a lot project but the team background as "BountyHunter" creating an ICO/Token they conduct an ico with only 600-1000 ETH. Paying a shit exchange to with low due diligence to make his own token can be tradeable on an exchange, only need 4-6 month they all disappear with making chaos on that project/price.

One point and you are correct.

But there were some other altcoins that doesn't even use a real name and picture of their developers. And figuring them out is out of this world, there's no way to detect them unless someone inside the team will leak their information and inform the community on what kind of developers they are.

On the other hand, if you already know the developer and you know the bad history of them, simply don't invest to their project.

crypto is about a digital product
thats why people focused to talk about shitcoins rather than shit dev buddy
as you know bitcoin is more famous than satoshi right ?

It is your subjective opinion, there are many professional developers in the crypto industry, the successful project teams also hire these professionals in order to make a better job. If there is no vision on the project, blaming the developers will not solve the shitcoin trouble in the ecosystem.  The developers don't want to see low prices on the market if they also hold the tokens as a replacement of their monthly salary. Who will want to see a down portfolio with contains the coins of the project you work as an employee?

In my own opinion, a token become shitty when the developer abandon it or when it become useless. The problem is almost all the projects has the same platform or most of them copied their platform from other projects. There is no uniqueness and originality that's why people don't entertain it.

There are developers who have developed more than one coin and they keep developing with the intent of raising fund and closing down the project to open another. One of the most effective ways of curtailing this is to ensure that reputable projects from reputable people should only be invested in.

Definitely your correct and I agree because the if the developers are shit of course the project are also shit lack of support and improvements how the project coins become successful. Without shit developers nothing shit coins in the list into coin market cap.

You can obviously do that, but it's going to be cyclical though, and you may have pile of names that nobody cares. But then again, the market is overly saturated with ideas that get repeated all over again. That's why there are a lot of shit projects of today because if you are going to look closely, there are no fundamentals behind that project. Just another regular developers who just thinks of scamming investors or listing their tokens on another shit exchanges and then abandon the projects and this goes over and over again. So what we can do is just stop investing on this kind of project so that they will just die down.

Even some kids have tried to create icos in the past. This time so many amateurs even with zero knowledge only wanna rent someone to create ico and then that will be increasing the list of the crap project and shitcoin.
But how to identify the dev is a difficult part in this case because these amateurs use fake identity and history to fool the investors. Even they are faking their skill

yeah many new developer that not even know about cryptocurrency and blockchain well. But they know how to make money fast, they using their popularity to attract newbie investor. Sadly there is no ruler or law to ban this kind of developer

There comes the difficulty. Crypto could be anonymous and most developers prefer not to reveal their identity and most of the scam exchanges uses a fake identity, pictures from the internet and random names. It's actually really easy to identify most scams. If you do that along with ditching the coins with anonymous team and listing the team members and advisers of scams and blacklisting them would prevent us from getting easily scammed.

Some of them are with fake profiles or hiding and using from profiles they hire from Fiverr or Facebook, some of them do have an account on Linkedin but there's no guaranty that these are really people, because you can put any kind of skills and they will not verify if you are that experts or you have that kind of position.

Spot on. There are many shady people behind raising a coin that's why it's also important to expose them so that they can't create another shit coins and then deceived the investors again.

But the problem is that people are still not DYOR, that's why those shit developers still continue their fraud and malpractice by running shitty coins around and investors gullible enough to shell out their money. Don't patronised them so that they will just be silent and stop what they are doing.

How is this going to be of any use for the ordinary cryptocurrency users? Cryptocurrencies developed by shit developers will obviously be shitcoins. There is no point in differentiating between these two. The only way to avoid shitcoins is to avoid in investing in any currency, whose development is not over. Many of the existing projects have only an idea, but they will be having very elaborate future plans. Avoid this type of coins.

Well this is unlikely. Even the real assets of stock market companies are almost never equal to the fundamental value. The stock market is not optimal.
Of course, the cryptocurrency market is even less optimal. Therefore, any asset in this market is overbought or resold with a high probability. And this is not bad, since the market price always fluctuates around the fundamental value. Thus, we can easily determine where the price will go in the future. We just need to be able to choose the most real projects from a huge pile of shit.

Many of these anonymous devs are either scammers or incompetent. We need more efficient ways to identify these "shit devs".

Products and owners are all the same, and sometimes these developers are anonymous and hiding behind the photoshopped images or profiles they steal from the internet.
But I do like your idea but people will still ask the name of the coin that developers created, because it's easy for us to recall the name of the coin than the developer, as much as it is easy for you to recall the name Nike, than who manage the company.

A good developer can be hired to build a project, may not be aware of the final intention of the project team. In the end, the project turns shitty, the developers may not have control over the future since they were only hired. Simply put: Unscrupulous team will always birth shitty coin.

Well, when you see a shit coin, you already see a shit developer because I believe that no good developer would ever allow their project to be turned to shit as they have the strategy to use to sustain the project, when binance started, people would have turned their project to shit, but because they have the right strategy, we could see exactly how great they became, you can even see the example of how they were able to manage their hacking issue which would have made them crumble till date just like cryptopia did, but they handle everything based on the strategy that they have.

A developer with good skill and strategy on the project is what we need to be watching out for, these are the things that has been sustaining all those coins you see in the top market.

I think it's worth talking about the developers of bad coins. The fact is why the appearance of bad coins and scam projects? The thing is that they understand that they almost never talk about them and no one will know who these developers are and how many bad coins they have already created. Based on this, they feel impunity and do their bad deeds. But if you start talking more about them more often, then there is a high probability that no one will come to them and will not buy their bad coins.

Now a bad team is unlikely to be able to raise even more money, since ico can not collect much, and it is very difficult to enter the ieo market you need to be a top developer.

Success must come first from the team having a good mindset of course. That’s true if the team abandon the project then its useless and no future at all this is why having a good member on a team is a must, those who can bring the team to the top. Shitcoins despite of having a good team is just a result of no interest from the public, that’s common.

Shit developers also create an account on the forum; thus they can create new accounts over and over
Shit dev is always equal to shit coin

So always dyor; focus on the basics and invest as you choose

By "shit developers" I presume you mean developers who are inexperienced, who do not care about project development, who misuse funds, who do not follow roadmap, who have no plans to add value to their coins etc. Well, it's true that most projects fail because of such "shit developers" but publishing names on this forum as suggested doesn't curb the issue. Do you know that some developers are impostors with fake profiles? So you might publish a false profile on this forum if we go by your suggestion, just saying.  

Most of the time these shitcoins are published by anonymous developers even if they are showing themselves in the forum they just hide behind their username. Calling them out and make a hall of shame for all these developers is simply a waste of time considering that they could make another account with different name. Well if the developers happen to reveal themselves in their project's website that's worth a try I guess.

It's the same people jumping from one project to another. It's normal in this space because they don't have to face any consequences when their project fails. People should learn to check new projects and teams and weed out dev teams made of scammers.

Only the market and the community can verify an altcoin now. You can't expect the police or the SEC to do it for you.

A coin answers the name of the developers or team or in a more better way, a coin is synonymous to its creators (developers); so if a coin is a shit coin it means the team is inexperienced and lacks knowledge. However, from a little research it has been shown that most of these developers goes as far as stealing people's details which they use, thereby calling them out won't have a huge effect as they will also create another to scam investors and users. I think the best way to stay safe in crypto investing is by following every project closely, read their whitepaper and ask provocative questions just to stir up their reactions, in most cases they will either ignore or ban the user or investor thus giving the investor the right answer he needs.
 

noobs and naive users will always buy those shitty coins or maybe even old timers so they can get fast cash.
 a lot are not considering the devs' intentions as long as they can get profit in short term basis. and that's a fact!
And why those crap projects are in continuous proliferation because they can always get their audience.

I don't think such a conclusion can be drawn. The market is not conducive, so many unexpected things happen, for example, tokens or coins whose prices are difficult to rise. It could be that the development team is people who are experienced or at least competent in their fields, but tokens or coins join in the market at a time that is less profitable then it becomes less valuable.

The developer created shitcoins at the first place, they worked to be a shitdeveloper because of not being competitve. If the project dies you have to look for other projects that can give a chance for you to earn. Shit projects doesn’t deserve your precious time.

shit developers have gotten more and more profit from each coin they make and then leave it. shit developer plays on ICO, which makes ICO less desirable. I once invested in coins that looked good and could be profitable, but the developer cheated all investors by not listing coins on the exchange and then just leaving them.

We know that's the essence because coin will not be created without a dev, so it should be the dev that will be blame in case the coin failed.
However, when it's already in trading exchanges, it will be traded by the name of the coin, not a name of the developers, so people call it based on its name which is easy to remember.

I hope you understand that, you can't call it dev coin, but call it by the name of the coin which could be a good coin or a shitty coin.

The incubator hub treatment is the main critical point of why new projects appear without the real working product. The developers go to make a clone of the old projects in order to collect more funds in the token sales. The IEO model saves the majority of the traders, investors should appreciate the job of the exchanges which eliminate the useless projects from this opportunity. Inexperienced developers just sit on the desk and they wait for the deadline of the duties. If there is no passion thinking about the fate of the project looks like a big nightmare for me. If the team hires the developers without explaining the perception of the project's roadmap, the developers will never care about the investors and project from my experience. Without a solid vision, the ambiguity will stay there for a long time.

I think if you want to publish the name of the developers, it is a bit too late because I believe they were already leaving the crypto sphere and now they are enjoying the money they have got from the investor.
It is difficult to track them because we don't know where they live.
They could give a false address on the website, and I am sure that it will be easy to do.
We don't know who they are, although they give their name on the website, and with some pictures of each team, we still don't know if they are true or not.
But there is not too late in publishing which they are, and I think that will help members here to identify them.
They don't serious with the project because of their reason to join in the cryptocurrency is because of the trend of making money from cryptocurrency itself.

Agree, coins can be made by anyone but bad intentions from the developer team that makes a coin into shitcoin. Without making a project that can produce a product, they can fool many people with large amounts of money and they should be jailed

I also agree with you, the shit dev and also the shit team must be made history books, so that we are not fooled twice
no matter which social media is still active or the account that has a linkedin is sometimes still a scam, an example of a project recently rumored to be a scam is miracle tele, I didn't follow the bounty but I had heard and updated the news, and it was really sad,

I don't think we should do that because some of the projects I know are where the CEO/COO just hire devs to create or work on the project. If they were shit devs then I don't think there wouldn't be investors at all because it will be seen as obvious scam from the  start. And some shitcoins was a result of either a failed project or an exit scam.

I don't necessarily blame the devs. Some actually tried to do their best to keep their projects alive but the space was full of get rich quick millennial so they had no patience to wait for projects to mature. Actually, what I have observed in crypto is that investors do kill projects at a faster rate more than the devs/owners.

that's an interesting way to look at it. I mean I wouldn't say all devs are terrible. Some just like to build things to build. I feel like some projects have just been one offs to test something

You cannot blame the investors for them, they will always do the pressure game because they want to have their ROI at the earliest possible time.

Devs should not work by their emotion but by their mind, they are expected to be qualified enough to develop the project and that includes accepting the pressure, therefore they need to make a good plan for the project to survive even in tough times, if some investors will leave, new ones might come if they see that the team are capable and the project has potential to grow, remember that IEO and ICO are mostly start up projects, so it will take time to see its real value.

That sounds reasonable. With this internet era, publicity is the best policy for cleaning the space. Social networks will help a lot.

These concepts are interrelated. If dev cannot provide normal development of the coin, such coin to will turn into shit. After all, they should try to provide for its normal value of the coin and development.

The problem lies on the developer because several of them do this kind of work to earn money and accept more work to earn more money.  I agree CEO/COO hires their developers but they must make sure that the developers their hired is solely focus on their project since these developers have a huge cut on the token and collected funds.  But if a project become shitty, both CEO and the team are to be blame because they did not do their task well.

I think there are a lot of scam projects because of very greedy developers, they just want to get a lot of profit but don't want to provide good developments for investors so that the projects fail in the middle of the road.