Bitcoin Forum

Im wondering if it's possible for new projects team to go through KYC themselves, why is it always investors going through KYC just to buy presale and tokens in crowdfunding? If teams are going through verifications it will be easier to track them down if they scam people, but how is this ever going to happen? Only top exchanges have such power for example binance, to save their credibility they have to do good screening on the project first, on teams and on projects use case, what do you think will work better ? SEC? Or what?

For this to work there must be something standing between the investors and the project team, do you ever guess why binance exchange launchpads are scam free? Because they do 💯 screening on the project themselves, this can only happen from a crowdfunding strategy like IEO or probably that MakerDao fundraising too, I heard it's strictly for real projects too

KYC means know your customer. You are their customer because you are the one patronizing them to invest in them. Probably you mean team must reveal their identity instead of using stock image or carton which is very rampant now. I believe many of them don't wanna give their identity probably because the project can end up being scam or mismanagement which might result in loss of investors money. However, when you see project with team that have traceable identity. Such project hardly turn to scam. The worst that will happen is to refund investors

Majority of the new projects do not want this to happen and also in regards to the decentralization and freedom which is the main point of a cryptocurrency. Since we saw some active participation of the SEC, alot of these scams has stopped.

If all projects were to do verification, majority will fold up, in fact some team will leave willingly because of their shady ways they have been running their project, this would also drastically reduce scams project from misleading the public but since crypto is less regulated, I don see it happening any time soon perhaps in the future.

It is not yet happening because there's no central authority to do this kind of verification. Right now, it is per platform like exchanges are doing their own investigations with the projects, like for example in IEO launchpads. The project needs to meet certain requirements based on exchange's requirements. But I don't think there will be governing body in the future to do this kind of verification thing. This is the reason why users are left to do their own assessment.

Before KYC, we just need common sense. Newbies fall to these projects no matter how stupid they look, so that's the main issue. I would personally not invest in something that I'm being promised. I mean, people fall into "pay me money and I will give you 2x" scams.. why would we have any kind of expectations?

There are few platform that launches new projects but indeed doing some KYC for the new projects before their endorsed and process through their token sale. I do hope that if ever that project able to scam some investors they could apprehended those people who did KYC.

Some dex like polkastarter and possibly centralized IEO on Binance, Kucoin, Huobi, Okex and many more are more reassuring. However this space is filled with degen trading that even not so good platform can manage to do some grip with investors due to hype.

Well there are projects that really exposed themselves in the beginning, show their face and identify. But majority are not 'force" to do this, that's why we need to be very careful who to trust to specially if there are no identification from the people behind.

Binance and other top tier platforms are doing verifications first before allowing the project to used their platform for IEO, but if ever they found out after they have been launch that the project is a scam, they will quickly stop the IEO or delist the token on their platform.

Still boils down to the reason that crypto market is open and free and decentralised, that's why we really need to do due diligence.

Verifications on project should be shoulder by investors.
Investors should not always put their money on random projects without doing such research or studies about what they are investing.
KYC to the owner of the project will not work or help the quality of the project. If their project is bad, it is already bad. If they want to scam you, they will scam you, with KYC or no KYC.

SEC will function better, I suppose

yes, these hackers are always lurking around the corner to get money from crypto circle...

I want to answer your question
In my opinion, Kyc on a new project is indeed a bit scary or a new exchange by offering coin rewards can only get our data after Kyc is sold again.

but here as far as I know a forum to discuss altcoins why do you ask about kyc that does not enter the core of the forum? apologize if I am wrong

That's why Binance is the most trusted exchange now and they will going to flourished every time they got some new coins listed on their exchange. Unlike other exchanges like for example Yobit, where most of the unknown coins have been listed, Binance is carefully screening their new partners and it took some time to be listed on their exchanges. I once participated in some of the coins where they want to be listed to Binance exchange and it took them almost 4 months to do so because of the huge numbers of coins to be approved.

Of cos why would they want this to happen? 80% of projects that are coming into crypto space have different plans in mind and they are strictly into money making only, they only pretend to deliver for starter but as time goes on things will change, they will definitely find all means to avoid KYC or any form of regulations

If this is to happen, I don't think many scam projects would have been created because there are instances where a project team will steal people's identity in order to look credible and in the end scamming their investors, which is the reason it is advisable to study the team of a project in order to know how credible they are. But the question would be, how can this be actualized when this space was meant to be decentralized, nevertheless I believe top exchanges do verify the project team of any project aiming to carry out IEO on their exchange, and I think this was the reason exit scams witnessed during ICO reduced considerably hence restoring investors confidence.
However, nowadays most projects are claiming to be Defi thus no way to verify the team or even know who they are, this also gives them the opportunity to exit scam as they want. Therefore in my own opinion, I think this might be hard to achieve, thus let's try our best to research on any project we want to invest in before doing so.

SEC involvement and regulation is the answer and I believe we aren't far from that anymore, KYC can't get the job done, it won't stop scammers from scamming people, all we can do right now is to keep doing strictly deep research on projects before investing money, another good advice is to keep joining IEO from binance exchange or top exchanges, they have their ways of avoiding scammers

Exchanges have their own criteria to be satisfied before a project to get listed on their exchange for coin offering. But they can't vouch for the details and its your responsibility to check whether the details provided by the team is right or fake.

Its is very easy simple though so if you don't want to take such efforts then no one is going to save you.

New team asking for KYC is really an unfair deal when it comes to investors and even for bounty hunters who just give aways their data not knowing their data could be used for scam.

SEC would be able to do ask for their identity as developers, it would also mean its a regulated project. When all these takes place though, it would also mean not a decentralized project. We've had many same projects like this but we're just fine.

It's already in work since IEO got launched, without verifications top exchanges can't trust new projects and won't allow them on their platform, it's why I prefer IEO over other crowdfunding, the top exchanges have something to lose (reputation) that's why they must protect users at all cost

luckily they stopped :o

Crowdfunding is the solution, the crowdfunding strategy is the one to implement KYC verifications and strict rules, it's why I'm giving DYCO full face, no scam projects or developers will go near DYCO because they will be caught, for now IEO have proven to be better and less scammy than ICO but better crowdfunding strategy will launch in future.

what kind of crowdfunding it is ? because when you say crowdfunding ico , ieo , sto and alike are already included with it but only ieo is so far the most secure type of crowdfunding .

 its not the crowdfunding itself that implents a kyc but there is a person behind it and they can choose what they want if they make a kyc for themself or not but usually crowdfunding owner dont include kyc for them selves but kyc is only for the investors but its possible to screen them if you own an exchange or other platforms before thry propose on you

Crowdfunding platforms can easily ask for KYC from new project teams and also do other investigations easily, I guess that's what apostlekin is talking about, something must stand between investors and the new projects for proper analysis or more

Yes, it is clear that IEOs on top exchanges are still better than other things like crowdfunding, because exchanges always protect their reputation from bad things that could have a bad effect on them.

Not going to work cos most new projects are now claiming decentralized, also we have standard DEX exchanges too, making things easier for new projects to do as they want, we have IDO (initial decentralized offering) too for those who don't want to raise funds through centralized exchanges, there are many ways to avoid verifications and regulations in crypto space now

That was also my question since 2017, but it just limited to those projects that have done with any fundraising campaigns like ICO, IEO, etc., and to all projects that have token offerings to the public/investors, they should be transparent and observe fairness by revealing they're true identity to the public to prevent any exit scammed practices.  

Exchanges are doing this through their IEO, some projects who opted for ICO do no thave any entity that regulates their crowdfunding, SEC can only do that if they are accepting Americans to be part of their investors, that is why we see a lot of ICO, do not accept Americans in their crowdfunding, they do not want SEC attention, crowdfunding is based on trust if you have a hint or you think that the people behind the project, are suspicious better not proceed.  

Projects can only give us project heads identity that can be found on white paper and this information is a great help researching about the project. It sucks but KYC is required by projects because of the protocols implemented to them. Having a KYC on the project team can't assure the quality of the project though it somehow improves the trust we can give to them.

It doesn't even need to steal identities. They can pay a few people to have real and actual, verifiable ones. And it can still end up as a scam. I know, because I've done my share of investing in projects. Due diligence, real people, real companies. But when they scammed, there was nothing we could do either. Even got some refund from escrow but the escrowers themselves let us down to be honest.

We are not really sure about that, I don't think team members should undergo KYC too. I think they will only require the investors and not the team itself but I think if they would be having the KYC I'm pretty sure many investors especially here in the forum will be interested to that particular project.

KYC must be done for countries that have regulations and require KYC to know the data of investors and project holders, for example country requiring KYC U.S
But I am a person who does not like KYC on a new project because cammers could have misused the use of the data we send. Please think,This is a new project and must be very scary

And how many new projects you see that are from US this year? Cos I don't see any, even those that are supposed to be launched this year are on halt because of lawsuit and regulations, they are been extremely careful because of SEC, majority of new crypto projects won't come from US, I'm sure of this

Anyway, it is their rules to do it and they part of the team project as well. But there are other projects campaign arise
here who has already listed under by SEC, but there are few of them only as far as I know. And still even is like that, there are
some of the projects even they don't any SEC requirements they can still give the bounty allocation without the KYC procedure.

It's a wish but it's never going to happen unless crypto get regulated and monitored but doing so will make crypto less powerful and vulnerable to manipulations from the law of regulations, the oy solution I can think of is better ICO like platform that will go deep into projects and be ready to hold teams responsible for any injustice moves or scammy ways

Till this day only IEO tend to fight off scammers through their crowdfunding methods, and I think they are able to be strict with it because of who they are, they don't want to ruin their long term strong reputation, binance launchpads, KUCoin, gate.io, huobi are all reliable when it comes to new ICO projects

Do not forget about audits as well. Nowadays most of the projects that create a new crypto (could be coin, could be token, could be defi who knows) can be audited, it costs a ton of money for it to be done and it takes ages to get done as well because they look to every single line of code and every detail on the project itself and the blockchain of it, but we are talking about finding out even the slightest of problems via the audit. That way you could be sure to invest into something you know that has no problems or chance of being a scam, that is why I believe it is crucial that we check an audit or any type of verification before we invest into something, if you do not do that you are leaving chances to the luck and I am not willing to bet on my own luck and would rather invest into factual statements given by the professionals about the project.

Yes, I agree that auditing and bug hunting can protect against frustration and loss of your money. For example, a blockchain project goes to IEO, but does not provide the results of code testing and external audit of the IEO. Will you entrust your funds to such a project? No security guarantees - no investment.