Bitcoin Forum

I feel like it's not fair for bounty hunters to submit KYC when joining bounty campaigns because we are not an investor. We will never be involved with any anti money laundering because we don't invest with money but with TIME and Effort instead. Personally I'm NOT very comfortable submitting my ID's for the simple reason that these are startup companies and we don't even know if they can be trusted.

Of course, its really needed for each bounty manager because most of the bounty manager still cannot do professional thing as we know like there are some bounty managers like wapinter, its very professional.

I don't think bounty hunters can oblige managers to do that, they can only do this for the project that they are working with but not for bounty hunters, it's on their agreement with the developer where they are working with, it's a business to business agreement, something that we bounty hunters have no access to.

Keep in mind that whatever your complaints about KYC, I don't think they will be able to change their decisions. Anonymous properties are no longer maintained. This is indeed contrary to the Crypto base. However, everyone also has the right to refuse it, but they will not receive tokens.

You have not stated your reasons why you think BM's should be required to submit KYC. Who do you think they should submit them to? The ICO team?

You can't compare them though. Your reasoning is flawed in the beginning. They are the ones running the bounty so I doubt that they should require KYC in the first place. If you wanted KYC then it should be the project behind and not target the bounty hunters themselves because they are just an employee of that ICO project.

Don't blame the bounty managers, it's not there own personal  idea but the project teams or developer, it's better not to join bounties that requires KYC if you don't want to submit your ID it's not by force

As for me, I don't see any big deal in enforcing KYC for bounty hunters in order to reducr the activities of cheaters. The only thing that I don't like about it is bringing kyc at thr dnd of the campaign knowing full well thaf not all hunters will have the required documents for it.

Whatever it is, I think it must always prepare documents for KYC. And actually we have been assisted since the beginning because there are many projects that have notified KYC since the beginning of the campaign. It's just that we also have to be careful because KYC isn't always good.

I actually stopped joining other projects that required KYC for bounty hunters. Maybe I am not thinking well who should be required (BM or ICO Team)  to submit KYC but regardless, aren't you bothered by giving your ID to people you  don't know? To a company that just started and hasn't proven anything yet? they can disappear and sell our IDs somewhere ( this always on my mind)

After seeing some untrusted managers were running scam bounty and that makes sense to do that. But they always try to create an alternative way by putting their own rules. Just try to avoid it rather than forcing them to do that because they will not do that.

This topic has been discussed so many times before and in my opinion KYC is also helping bounty hunters, why?

Because KYC can eliminate all that multiple accounts that cheating the bounty, so the stakes will not go to them and back to the non cheated bounty hunters.

KYC at the beginning was better than having to be KYC in the midst of a bounty campaign, so the point is we have to be careful in KYC because our ID is more important and valuable so that the identity is maintained.

Yes, I agree, because it has been proven that many Bounty participants use multiple accounts, so it will be detrimental to honest participants, so it is not a problem to need KYC for Bounty participants. But it is very fair if the Bounty manager is also required for KYC.

it is not fair to anybody to submit their KYC to someone who is not abiding by the law themselves.
KYC is required when the place that is asking for it is already regulated and is bound by law to protect your identity and the personal documents that you give them but when the ICOs are just random people who don't abide by any law and they have always sold your documents online there is no reason for you to give it to them!

Why bounty managers have to do KYCs. Most of them have been in the list of DT members for too long, most of them get highly positive trust, and most of them have many contributions to the forum. I implied about good managers, not the one whom tend to promote scam projects, or scam ICOs.
It is the same for Escrow service providers, highly trusted.
In general, why high trusted users have to do KYC?
In addition, KYCs come from demands of companies that run bounties, not come from the forum laws.
Lastly, theymos does not support the idea to have KYC requirements for public places like our forum.

It may good ideas, probably.
However, the necessity of KYC is from the team of the projects commonly, not from the Bounty Manager, right?
Many BM sometimes doesn't tell the bounty hunters at first that they will need KYC to get or receive the rewards.
However, in the middle or at the end of the bounty program, the team changes the rules. Anyone who wants to get and be able to receive the tokens or ICO must fulfill KYC because it is is an obligation from the bank or others. IN this case, It may also happen to the BM, they also should fulfill the KYC process in order to receive the rewards from the team of the projects.
In my opinion, the important thing is that the real data of the project team and developers proved by their ID document in order to ensure to the investors and bounty hunters that they are real, they are not scammers.

Well there are some bounty campaigns, that assumes you as an investor since they distribute your payment as they distribute the coin to the investors, so they threat bounty hunter the same as the investors, and the law in their state demand KYC from all of their customers including bounty hunter. And I believe before any project hire bounty manager they will do more than KYC.

here we go again with the kyc issue again. So we are no longer talking about project teams doing kyc, we are going to be talking about bounty managers doing kyc, what for? You have no good reason why that should happen and still it can't be carried out

There are bounties that can fill up the kyc on their website because it's a challenge to withdraw their rewards with their earned rewards in the bounty and do it to be fair to other bounty hunter and avoid multiple accounts of other bounty hunter but I can tell if the kyc really kick in bounties I can say it's not because of the privacy of these bounty hunters and should not be so or least of their information because of their privacy and so much bounty to come out and not all are legit scams too and the other is kyc ss their bounty so it's so risky because they can use your kyc in scam by other people.

Do you really think that bounty participants can force that issue in the bounty managers? And I don't think that the bounty managers are the one who implements that. It's the project itself. You really can't protest over it. The best move you can make is just to avoid the bounties that implements KYC.

I think he wants bounty managers to submit KYC to the ICO team, because no bounty hunters can ask that, that's actually none of our business although it is recommended submitting KYC should not be done in public and should only submitted internally between the two parties, in this case, bounty managers and the ICO,

I'd go a step further - there should be an industry third-party association to KYC not just bounty managers, but also ICO companies. Companies with founders who fail the KYC should not be allowed to demand KYC documents, IMO.

1. The project didn't encourage you or force you to submit a KYC document, there's a lot of bounties out there that doesn't required KYC documents.
2. The managers didn't need to provide KYC... what for? and to whom they're gonna pass it? to all bounty hunters (come to think of it)
3. The KYC verification didn't come from the manager rules, it came from the project represntative/team itself.
4. To make this clear, the managers didn't get your KYC for verification but to avoid bounty abusers and bounty farmers.

Note:Some managers just really want your KYC documents please be careful and protect your privacy.

If you're not comfortable to it, it's simple... They didn't force you... DON'T JOIN.

I like your idea but i think it would be too hard to make this a possible one. Maybe if we feel too hesitant to submit KYC then we can still search for another campaigns that don't require KYC yet. But most of the legit ICOs today are already asking KYC so we don't have choices but to comply with them. After all as long as we get paid in the end then it would be fine.

I think it is a good idea to requires KYC for bounty managers but I think they gonna agree with it. Bounty managers are also bounty hunters but there job is more complicate than to us bounty hunters, for the reason that they whole bounty while we are just doing our weekly tasks. If you don't like bounties which requires KYC then don't join with those bounties. Always remember that the bounty rewards still depends on the outcome of the ICO, so we don't have to blame the bounty managers if we don't get any rewards.

Which is right it's between the team and the manager, they have agreement in between so its not the hunters business to know about that and
if they needed to process the KYC, the job should be done and there's no other obligations from the part of the managers, it's really the hunters
job to find and select good project to participate.

First of all what they offer is not that large so KYC's should not really be mandatory.

You are correct. If they really want their bounty hunters to submit KYC then maybe the team needs to do it first.
Or, you could all just participate in their telegram group where they will submit their KYC or in pinned post and then you will just follow before the payment is done.
We should all be fair here, for they could use your personal information with evil intentions.

Most of KYC requirements come from companies that run promotions for their projects, not come from bounty managers. When bounty managers solely decide asking for KYCs, it is not a good thing, and personally I don't join such campaigns managed by such 'curious' managers. Even KYCs require by projects, I most likely ignore them due to my privacy protection.

We have to agree that the ICO teams continue to abuse their rights and require bounty hunters to undergo a KYC check. We should not undergo such testing, because we do not invest in ICO projects and therefore cannot be the targets of combating dirty money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism. This situation will continue as long as the ICO remains unregulated.
I do not consider it necessary to require an ICO bounty manager to undergo a KYC check. This figure solves almost nothing. To pass the test more serious than KYC, should the team ICO. Moreover, such verification should be carried out by a third party and include personal verification of the members of the ICO team.

KYC for Bounty manager? Why? They arent tied up with the project most of the time and most of them are just being hired so i dont get the point
why would they needed to sent up some documentations too.Even the manager of said bounty is part of their time, we cant still assure that they would able to comply.

I think some ico rating givers have given a KYC column for ICO founders to be seen as in the icobench there to be able to get a rating at least the ICO founder must do KYC.

I think that not bounty managers require KYC from bounty hunters but the developers of the ICO projects. bounty managers just do what they have to do.

often beginning many complain his times to ask discussing about KYC for the hunters.

So, it's actual that logically statement from the manager bounty because him also in demand a spreading this information to the mention group. Its kind annoying that to kick off is not said the kyc required and then last time it needed pass-kyc when completed or will to complete, once again this’s a disappoint.

It can’t be help!! So it’s be true such a procedure, don’t want to receive well please just “it is a statement that really sick what we have done”

I think, if a campaign where do KYC required it should be was representing or write words in thread and then it will be better.

They also do not want scammers and citizens from restricted countries to be in their projects. KYC is the best way to solve this problem. If it is already mentioned in bounty, do not join.

Bounty managers should first submit their KYC before they require bounty hunters. There is no chance a bounty hunter can acquire a big amount of their tokens that can be used in illegal activities while bounty managers do. There was a bounty campaign I joined before that the bounty manager ran away with all the token allotment for bounty hunters and it was so disgusting that a lot of bounty hunters who worked hard to get paid were not paid.

I think it very actual question, because a lot of scam on bitcointalk and bounty hunters need some protect from scamers and scam projects

When you work as a bounty hunter in a project, it would means that you are working for the project not invest to project. You are becoming team member right? So they can ask for the KYC procedure for the investors but not from their team. Also many bounty campaign asks KYC after the campaign ends, just before they send the payments! This is not something ethic..

Yes, KYC is actually not used for bounty hunters. This is done only for investors. But now many ICO projects also provide KYC for Bounty participants. I have no problem with KYC, but after I did KYC. Many projects fail and are no longer developed.

It can be interpreted that KYC is not always good and not everyone likes it even though in my opinion it is good to avoid multi-purpose on a project. I honestly like it, but now almost all projects need KYC and fortunately it's not fraud. I hope KYC can provide a guarantee or imbalance that is in accordance with what we provide.

BMs are already well known to the community and many of them active for many years.
KYC is not obligatory in each campaign and it is our decision if we participate in such bounty or not.
Project leaders also do the KYC (not all) but if they want to scam they will do it anyway.

Well, I also disagree in doing that, but for now, somehow, more managers or project teams ask us to do KYC if we want tokens, it's not necessary because we don't buy tokens when the ICO takes place and if the token enters the market so some people on the market also can't do KYC in market purchases, right? But there are several other reasons for KYC, which deceive some prize participants so they do it, which is the most correct goal.

Exactly, I was hoping to read the reason why the bounty managers should need KYC. I know it's frustrating having worked as a bounty hunter and when it's time for payment you are now been asked to submit KYC. Thats what Bounty hunters should be fighting for

I believe you have a point here. Verification of the source of funds is important, but bounty hunters do not send funds. They put effort instead and that's something that AML should not be concerned of.

Most of this policy were not introduced by the managers but the developers, and some if their reason for the KYC is that there are some country where the projects in question is not accepted as a result of some of the terms and conditions that are contrary to the existing law buy the government.

The bounty manager has an agreement with the project team. And only they can demand that he go through KYC, taking him to manage the bounty, and this is not the manager who initiates the condition about the passing of KYC by bounty hunters. It also sets the team of a project. And to participate in this project or not, you decide.
Therefore, always clarify the terms of the bounty before taking part in the project, and the practice of passing KYC at the end of the bounty is not uncommon. I am not a supporter of passing KYC, and do not trust my data to unauthorized persons!

Thats a good suggestion. I second this idea and strongly agree  wirth it. By doing this we can lessen somehow this many scam bounty projects sprouting everywhere. Since KYC really reveals oneself and entity, I think theres no impostor anymore can just be manager of a certain project and in this way also all bounty hunters will be paid faithfully.

Spare yourself some headache and stop joining bounty campaign that is asking KYC from the very beginning of bounty campaign.

Based on the trend only those project that offers security tokens is usually asking for KYC for bounty participants so better skip all those STO's and stick with ICO that is operating outside the US

if the manager is also required by Kyc, it will be very fair. because they give their real identity just like participants. so if managers or bounty teams do scams, they can be easily tracked and found.

I think this sounds like a good idea. To have the kyc for bounty managers is like even, when they require bounty hunters to do a kyc thingy. But i think there should be no kyc and not necessary for the bounty hunters.

If bounty manager will do KYC,that will be the decision of the developer and the team.

I don't agree with kyc, infact nobody should submit their kyc for the bounty, crypto world supposed to be world of anonymity, and the project is a new project with small trust, we don't know how will the developers used the identity, they can used the data for identity theft without we knowing

And then you will be rewarded with scam coins. Which has no use for any in the future. If it's not worth it, then do not. It is still better to study the coin before investing your time.

Bounty managers is also like bounty hunters they were hired for the work and they will get paid as well like hunters so asking them for KYC is also not fair.

If you are not comfortable to submit any IDs to anyone then don't join on bounties because most of the projects were asking for KYC these days so better to join on bitcoin paying campaigns.

I certainly agree with you. I guess that's the fair thing to do but I'm also sure that bounty managers won't do that for bounty participants. I guess some participants are doubtful to pass the Kyc requirements because they think that they're putting their private and personal information at risk. If bounty managers would pass the Kyc as well, participants would feel eased and confident to pass Kyc.

you are right, sometimes choosing the project also makes us disappointed. because we have invested our time in the project to promote them but we get nothing, then what is obtained is only disappointment.

I also agree bounty manager should be the first to do the KYC.
I think it is only fair to ask them to do it first since they are the first to promote the project and they are the manager of the bounty.

That is very good, but sometimes KYC is directly on web project itself, Bounty Manager is just a teller. But if there is a form like from a Google document, we have right to ask to original project team, that, is that true?

If you can know wapinter to be a professional manager without using his KYC has a requirement, then why are we not apply your same method to other managers? And if they eventually do the KYC we requested for, of what use exactly it is to us, I don’t know.

Even if we get to know their personality, we can’t do much about them, because that will not guarantee that they will present a good project to us, the same way we view the projects we participate in is the same way they view it too, the only difference is that, they are just coordinating things.

Bounty managers are not our problem, scammers are and KYC should be requested from the company, not the bounty manager who is also an employee like us.

If KYC requirements made by companies with original and main purpose to prevent abusements from bounty hunters, I believe companies don't have intention to require managers that they hire to work for them have to do KYC. One campaign often managed by one manager, so how the only manager of each campaign can exploit campaign. Morever, if companies hired highly trusted managers, they certainly don't have to care too much about abusements from managers. In a summary, KYCs are not mandatory and unneccesary for campaign managers.

I understand that kyc has been a privacy issue for most ICOs and bounty participants. While most don't see need to do kyc, others avoid any project that requires doing it. For scam ICOs, what will they do with the people's I do that they have. For me, I'm not too comfortable with sharing my personal informational knowing fully well that a lot do happen in crypto space.

in fact we must know in advance what the purpose of this project is to require Bounty hunters to verify KYC, if the aim is to reduce fraud in the bounty progam then all bounty hunters must do so, that is sufficient reason to make such an order but if the objective is it will make sense if you reject it so we have to ask the goal first so that we can determine the steps we will take, whether to agree or reject

I have the same opinion, so if anybody requires a KYC process from you, every team member, bounty manager and developer needs to pass the KYC process as well, because it would be fair to another bounty hunters.

Yeah sad reality about this issue wherein projects hire bounty managers that are not trusted and I think this is so unfair for us bounty hunters to undergo KYC but how about those not reputable managers? We bounty hunters just invest our time and effort not money so why we need to submit KYC? Though we can choose which project to take part with but I do hope that there should be a fair treatment regarding the matter.

Exactly dude because as of now?KYC requiring is being abused and most of them are the developers that taking KYC from us
You are right about they must provide first before us being investors and also hunters because in this can we can find how reliable and truthful the project is all about

Interesting title, but it would be better if you ask KYC for team members of ICO's. I don't think there is any role of bounty managers regarding KYC verification. Actually its required from team, managers just write on behalf of team.

I am not fan of KYC really for any crypto-currency projects since crypto itself is anonymous. It was not really goal of crypto-currency. But unfortunately most of ICO's asking for KYC. Hunters could change it if they do not joined this kind of bounty. Not is it?

Exactly, KYCs most probably not required by bounty managers. They don't have reason to do this requirement, only the projects' owners or companies that hire them to run bounties do require KYC. Moreover, KYC or not, it does not make sure that bounties will spread successfully what the projects aim at. KYC, in fact, might reduce abusements from bounty hunters, but in aspect of benefits, I don't think KYC will make sure that campaigns run more efficiently, and can bring more benefits to projects.

I don't even see any reason whatsoever why investors will be asked to carry out KYC process when participating in an ICO, the worst part of it is that this ICO companies after collecting your information turns out to be shitcoin and then you never know what next they do with your information. I don't participate in projects that ask me for KYC when I am not making use of fiat as a means of payment, I see it as unnecessary and against what the blockchain was built for, this is why we have to be very careful with so many claimed to be ICO projects.

I do not like your idea of KYC for bounty managers. You need to remember that our managers are just part of this community like you and myself and the decision of requirement of KYC is being made from the dev/owners of ICO and NOT by managers as far as I have experienced.

I think basically the more reason why most projects require kyc is because most hunters have abused the hunting system by using multiple accounts....that being said the major problem I have with most projects is that they tend to introduce this kyc process after the campaign must have gone far or even about to end which is prolly a bad idea....projects should endeavor to inform hunters about the kyc requirements before the bounty campaign

It’s their right to remain private because they are prone to criminality’s there are lots of bad elements there that attacking cryptocurrency investors now and exposing their identity is just like putting them as a bait.but it would be a big points for investors and also hunters to spend their money and time supporting the projects

Sounds kinda good and even for all crypto enthusiast. If the ico projects requiring bounty hunters for a mandatory kyc, there should be also a kyc thingy in the part of bounty managers. This is just a fair case in the side of bounty hunters and bounty managers. This should be implemented i think.

There are currently too many bounty managers and equally too many dead projects and the crypto market.

Some good project however have bad bounty campaigns in which rewards are been slashed or the bounty manager simply didn't calculate well the hunters rewards.

I think if bounty hunters will have to fulfill much processes, then the bounty managers should also be obligated to do much in an open , decentralized and transparent.

Kyc for bounty mangers will be a step in the right direction

In this scenario, then the KYC requirement should be demanded from the project team or developers and not bounty managers, I don’t see the advantage of this very our own KYC, if bounty managers do KYC, then what effect does he have on us.

The main reason why we need KYC is to know people we are dealing with if they are scam or genuine, which not all bounty managers are members of such project, so the best is to make it open for developers and if bounty manager falls in this category, then he can do the same too. Not many developers can handle separating bounty hunters, how would they know that the person is registering has bounty hunters is not lying about it?

The Green trust may be one of KYC's priority choices. Green trust retired users often offer a lot of benefits, and it is like guaranteed insurance for the project. I hope we can evaluate the ICO project through a manager have Green trust.

I have not seen any bounty that prioritizes green trust, most of them do not accept red trust accounts. Most bounty has a favor for those who have a higher merit than their rank of 10 merit or more. With KYC, everyone is equal in the inspection process

Maybe managers have their own priorities with green trust factor, who knows? It might be right with good campaigns, that are competitive. What if managers screen all applicant lists, and find some users have nearly same quality (of their posts), then I believe trust might become a next thing managers will consider to choose participants for their campaigns. The factor usually does not mention in campaigns rules, but it exists for sure.

If there would be a third party that will going to manage and implement regulation for the KYC of the managers, we can say that will be good and has a chance to happen. But if there is no, it is just nonsense as scam projects will just fake their identities in order to present it to the market. In that case, we cannot assure the reliability of the project.

Bounty manager only manage on bounty campaign and i dont think its related to bounty payment. I think thats why ICO should regulated by government. With government regulation, i am believe ICO scam can reduced

Yeah, i fully do t see any reason for having a kyc for bounty campaign. They dont need to know which people do the advertisement because it will not cause any good to their project. I only see one reason for it, just to limit and lessen the hunters that will be paid at the end of the bounty. I have heard a lot of incident of getting 0 for the whole weeks doing the task just because kyc isnt accepted.

Exactly, if these ones are being asked to go through kyc, they might have known the rigors of having to go through the seemingly troubled process and probably they may also get discouraged on going through too.

I wonder why it is so difficult for devs to understand this. We are not investors and as such we should not be forced to perform kyc before getting paid. They need to know this and stop coercing us into it as it is unlawful

This what I believe, I don’t believe that asking Bounty \Managers any KYC would solve any challenge, anyone asking should tell me exactly what the KYC requirement from bounty Managers will really solve.

We really need to learn not to divert our attention, this is why many of us fail to achieve some things because we don’t set our priority right, we were already on a path to push for KYC to be done too by project team, we are yet to achieve this, we are picking again on bounty managers, we are even still yet to stop these projects from requesting for KYC from hunters.

I don’t see any different between Bounty Manager and Hunter, they are also hunting too, just that they get to lead us.

We now have two things to watch out for, first if the ICO is legit  and will succeed in their ICO, because either way, you will not get rewards for 3 to 6 months campaigns, second if they change the rules from not asking KYC before the start of the campaign, to now asking KYC after the ICO is finish.

I think that' fair enough. That would ensure that bounty managers would not allow just random, shady campaigns to start without them making thorough screening first. And the bounty hunters would have something to hold on to if they don't get paid or if the bounty ended up as a scam.

I understand it is unfair to regular bounty hunters, but their little they can do, it is just like the captain of a class in a school, for the fact that he is a captain doesn’t exempt him from following the rules of the school, the only difference between him and his class mate is just that he has been delegated to control things but not formulate policies.

Bounty managers are not the ones formulating these KYC requirements but rather project developers who gave them the project to manage and I think they don’t have much influence over their policies. Although they can advise against it, but it is left for the developer to take it or not and not obliged to do so.

I do not think you have actually found out the reason why some projects do want KYC for everyone including the bounty hunters. Before I explain further let me inform you that most time. It is not the bounty manager that makes it compulsory for hunters to do KYC but the dev team themselves. Now the reason while some project do make it mandatory is because of the financial rules and regulation of the country where the business is registered and irrespective whether you invest or you do not, everyone will be required to complete KYC verifications. Although some project have turn things around and use this KYC project to reduce amount of token that is being distributed to hunters.

I don't like the KYC actually. However, I would also like to congratulate the managers who tell the that KYC is required at the beginning of the bounty. Because i think, it is a very helpfull to learn at this information the very beginning. And I join the the bounty campaigns which the want KYC of the managers which i trust. Because I don't think a project that those managers trust will distribute my id information.

This is the most fair remark for all ICO projects, as well as for IEO
Currently, with such an offer,  bounty chat admins can easily remove you from the group, and this is bad.
We need to change this trend!

Yes, A responsible Bounty Manager announce KYC requirements for all participants before starting the campaign and this should be the standard for all bounty managers so less surprises when it comes to bounty payments distributions.

You have a valid reason but they kept asking them and the worst part is they change the rule from not asking to now asking it, because they want to save their token and they want limited number of bounty hunters to get their token, all they want is free marketing I don't trust this kind of ICO.

That should be standard but there was a lot of managers didn't even give any announcement regarding it, only some trusted developers were giving an announcement about the possibility of KYC procedure to complete all of the requirements.

Kyc for bounty hunters is unnecessary.Following rules and regulations and law is good. And there is no denying it. But i am not a very big fan of KYC in general. It negates the whole point of crypto currencies. Cryptos main advantage was anonymity and KYC is just totally opposite to it. But anyway if the laws says that KYC should be implemented, then it should be implemented.

some of the floaters and managers also do that, we can trust and do KYC if the project that is followed really has the potential for success. I think it's still fair for bounty, but I don't think it's necessary to airdrop with KYC.

I agree with you, Bounty hunters should not pass KYC, but if the team requires Bounty participants to pass KYC, Bounty Manager is just telling this info to the hunters.

Asking bounty managers to do kycbis not really enough, compared to making the team of the project itself to do kyc and the community has to be aware of it.
As a matter of fact, after all said and done,  bounty hunters should not be asked to do kyc.

Or you can just not join the bounty program. If a project looks suspicious why would you join their campaign anyway

Exactly. And the kyc requirement is not coming from the bounty manager, it is from the project itself.
Though you are not investor per se on their platform, but as a holder of their token, I believe you are included to follow the legalities where they are being licensed to operate.
Bounty manager has the prerogative to accept such campaign, it depends on many factors such as payment scheme, the authenticity of the project, the scope of work, and many other things.
And if the bounty manager accepts tokens as payment for his services, then, I believe he will undergo the KYC stuff also. It's not our business to ask that anyway.
So if a bounty hunter is not comfortable sending his identity to a project, better read the rules before joining.

I think it alright that bounty managers do kyc first but let's think that the success of the project or bounty is not basing to the bounty managers. They also work for every project, the team is the one who will do their best to make their project successful. That's true we need to be very careful to give our identity we need to be sure that the project is really good and worth it.

What you say is true. We are actually not investors but only bounty hunters. But I can do KYC and it depends on the project. For example, I did KYC for the Bcnex project. Because in my opinion Bcnex Exchange is a project that really exists and is good. Therefore I immediately did KYC before participating in their bounty program.

I dont think bounty manager have relation with developers team. Bounty manager mostly only manage the bounty campaign, not the project or payment. I think sometimes bounty manager scammed by developers team because its scam ICO. If the project are good, i think hunters will getting his payment

Different prospective in every people who fully support and believe the projects that they've participated in, if you think that the coin will prosper risking your identity for the sake of rewards can be done, though it's really risky but it's your preposition if you will allow and take it.

This is a good opinion for the bounty hunters because if they are going to trust the bounty managers with their personal information then they should also be trusted by the bounty managers to share their personal information with them so it will create fairness on both side and there will be no fraud that is going to happen.

They surely have relationship with the team, but not a direct relationship but on a business relationship, because I believe that no bounty manager will just pick up a project to manage that they are not contacted to do.

It is just as if you say hunters does not have any relationship with bounty manager, without a bounty manager contracting a portion of it out for us to promote, how do we get to know about such project, but what I do not agree with people is the issue of KYC for bounty manager, yes, they will do their own KYC too for these developers, just like everyone of us, but not for us to ask them for KYC as if they are the ones deliberately scamming us.

I don't like to easily hand over my KYC information and I will only do it to trusted parties.  A lot of these bounties on this forum are sketchy at best so I don't participate in them.  You never know what criminal will get their hands on your documents.

I do not think that bounty hunters should first of all pay attention to the ICO bounty manager. First of all, the ICO team must pass the full test. Moreover, in this case, KYC verification will not save us from fraudulent ICO projects. The ICO team should be checked by authorized state bodies with the verification of the originals of their personal documents. I hope that in some time it will be so.

Unfortunately I agree with you, but for owners of the company who ask for KYC, this does not bother and they will not change their decision if they decide to enter KYC even for bounty hunters, so I try to bypass such companies, but if I see that the company interested me then I'm ready and go through the KYC.

Had been into bounties who would announce KYC requirement for bounty payment at the end of bounty. This is unfair because not everyone likes doing KYC since it is risky to share identification and credentials.

This should be announced at the beginning of the bounty so that hunters will be aware if they will join the bounty with KYC or not.

I have come to also observe that some bounty managers connive with the project team to impose KYC after the bounty campaign has ended so that any tokens not claimed by the hunters who do not want to give out their IDs will be taken and shared among themselves.

I also prefer skip participating in such bounties because the reward is small but the requirements (including KYC) are too high.

The KYCs that exist today do not at all correspond to the correct one, because this clearly conceals the intention that the SEC actually has to verify all that is in the world today. I think that there are opportunities to really do a lot in this world.

It will be your option to participating or not in some bounties which requiring KYC to get reward, but it still fair.
The most unfair situation is, when the bounty has ended, it requiring KYC for the participants.
This is happening often in some campaigns, which is very unfair for bounty participants.

of course it's mandatory, because of that I prefer a trusted bounty manager and also with a clear identity like bountyhive.
honestly I don't really like the bounty manager of this forum.

Actually we cannot force the bounty manager to do KYC first. Because they don't force you to participate in the bounty program. Usually the bounty hunter does the policy on the project itself. If you lack trust in the bounty manager, of course a good step is not to participate in the bounty.

there is any some bounty managers also submit their names in a spreadsheet as a signature participant, the bounty manager should also pass through the kyc besides him as a bounty manager but he is also a participant in their own campaign that he manages. to be fair together.
but if the manager only manages the campaign does not join the bounties, he does not need to follow kyc.

The absence of spreadsheets with an exact indication of the number of participants and the stacks earned by them does not inspire confidence in bountyhive. Data on the number of participants specified on the site can not be verified. Therefore, bounty managers on BTT are more acceptable.
And to pass the KYC or not, everyone decides for himself.

Requiring KYC is wants of the projects. I don't think is good a idea for the bounty manager to submit their KYC. Because KYC implemented or create into different project it will have many complains bounty hunters because they will not join their multiple account or to prevent cheating.

I think that passing KYC for head managers will not solve the problem. Even if they go through this procedure, the project may turn out to be Scam and for bounty hunters they will not cancel KYC.

Personally I do not like this trend with KYC for each and every payment, because crypto currencies are aiming to achieve the anonymity by payments and we are moving towards completely different direction right now.

KYC is for customer right. The bounty hunters are the promoters of project they shouldn't make bounty hunters to do that and spend a time for answering KYC. They are the promoters,advertisers. If the bounty manager requires KYC for the project they should put it on the first page and they should also done it before saying to us.

This solely depends on the project team members who decide about the KYC, yes or no. There might other reasons for requiring a KYC for bounty participants like protecting multiple entries from the same users, having data for anyone who has their coins, or simply it can be an extra layer of security for them. Don't always think negative, but yes I also hate KYC for bounties. I try to avoid any KYC that I can trust, or if it's not a good project.

Its really depends on what type of project bounty we are joining, Some ICO that is based in the US really requires all Token Holders to be KYC verified so that includes Bounty Hunters,. So don't join any project that is under the palm of SEC.

I think that you can talk a lot on this topic, but one thing becomes clear.  In any case, the bounty manager of the company is obliged to warn about the provision of personal data from the very beginning of the bounty company.  A member of the Bounty company must make a choice whether or not to participate.  And today, most of the Bounty companies insert before the fact at the end of the work performed that the condition for receiving remuneration is the indispensable provision of passport data.  What conditions should be written on the main page of the Bounty company, What you correctly talked about.

The purpose of KYC is for the security and to know who will buy the coin, but it can also be used against you and to sell that in a black market. Asking for the KYC of the campaign manager is not possible because they prefer also not to expose their identity. If you don't want KYC then look for other bounties that don't require it.

I agree with your idea
but I don't think that will apply and apply to bounty campaign managers.
so it will be biased and futile, in my opinion Bounty is no longer popular and will be even less
gradually the bounty will likely be replaced by something new. yes this is only my thinking

 :) I agree with your topic fairly. For those who need Hunter to know their ID card or any document, there must be reason for it. It has a lot of negative impact for Hunter, and for work.

If i would do a an ico, i would choose my bounty manager face to face. So kyc won't be necessary at that point. Althought i don't know how ico's choosing them.

Some projects are saying they request KYC from bounty hunters in order to identify and remove cheaters and not necessarily to identify customers.. All the same, bounties these days don't give that much so they do not worth sacrifing our identities for.

There are such bounties asking for kyc but there is very little bounty with kyc for the kyc should not be required in bounties because of its privacy of bounty hunters I know kyc is just for investors in ico but the when I know the kicks are bounty it's legit and their project will be successful but be careful as well as bounty asking for kyc in bounties when looking at the bounty that comes out especially bounty the scam is my way of looking at the bounty is to look at the website and look at the admin if they are legit or not and we think of the token sale if they have a great deal and think of their partnership that i know in view of bounty legit.

actually it doesn't need to be done, because the bounty managers and bounty hunters are certainly different.
maybe even actually the bounty managers have given KYC to DEV before the bounty starts and before they manage it.

Bounty Managers doesn't receive the project tokens, instead they pay them with bitcoin or ethereum or literally any coin with enourmous volume out their, bounty managers requiring KYC doesn't really make any sense, that's what i know as far as i know, correct my if im wrong.

maybe that could be one of the good things if there are requirements for managers before they apply the cyc to bounty participants. this is useful for maintaining the security of assets of each party and this can be fair.

Slowly crypto is being regulated. Bounty hunters will need to adapt.

Funds go into projects, those funds must be checked.

Funds go out from projects and onto bounties and those funds must also be checked.

Can't just pay out without KYC, that'd be paradise for criminals of all sorts!

You've got some point but also bounty managers need to filter real people from cheaters so they can just give the right bounty rewards for real people. If this is a real risk for you then I advise you shouldn't enter bounty campaign that requires KYC.

 KYC requirement is inappropriate for bounty manager and there are no strong arguments against my opinion. The manager is there for managing the bounty campaigns and bounty hunters are not responsible for the scam projects.

The bounty manager, essentially the same hired employee as the bounty-hunters, the responsibility for KYC is only the desire of the project team, but for what purpose is the question.

We are just following their rules they have the ability to change whatever the rule is and if you don't want to do kyc you are free from not joining a platform that doesn't have a kyc but for now all I can say that kyc is required for all bounty hunters because many hunter are using multiple account thats why kyc is required for all the hunters so that maulitple user cannot join in one single campaign.

The time you're using to promote the project is an investment. Investments shouldn't be looked at only the monetary aspect time is money too. KYC most times is used to cut account farmers out of a campaign and enable only true participants earn their rewards.

KYC to me is not needed for bounty hunters, bounty hunters helps to create awareness and advertise a project, on the contrary they should be appreciated for the work they are doing. KYC for BM isn't needed if I may say

Bounty managers today are potentially dangerous people. I do not want to say about all bounty managers. But think for yourself, because they can create fake bounty in order to simply collect your KYC documents and then do with them whatever they want.

All the standard are a must announced, In the case that there was a lot of bounty managers are not even give any announcement about the KYC procedure, The chance is that some trusted admins were giving an accurate announcement on having the KYC system to collect or complete all of the required to get rewards.

I think add KYC for bounty is good to remove bounty hunters who cheating with multiple account.
I think do KYC is no problem if that is easy. I mean is if in KYC no need voice record and no need take a picture with hold text.

It is great idea, now many projects and managers ask KYC, but it will be fair if they will pass KYC too and it will approve that project is true, not scam!

I personally also do not subscribe to the idea of submitting my personal information for kyc in the name of participating in bounty campaigns. And that is why I get my information right from the outset, any bounty campaign that requires kyc is a no go area for me.

Let say they will do kyc, who will verify their kyc and who guarantee they not pay someone to do kyc on their place and on this way to try scam bounty hunters, but anyway i think bounties are more ok than ICOs.

As of now there's still no infrastructure to verify the KYC of a bounty managers, Unlike developer that has an option like KYD and ICO Bench, But for Bounty Managers there's none and we just need to trust our instinct in choosing a reputable BM before joining any campaign

I actually don't see a big deal in passing KYC as a bounty hunter but the only big deal there is that some project will not notify hunters in the beginning that there will be KYC but when the campaign ends then they will come up with mandatory KYC. I think that's the only unfair part that affects bounty hunters.

I consider it fair that, to begin with, the bounty manager must go through KYC, and only then all the rest. This will increase the credibility of the project.

Bounty managers are not responsible for the scam projects IMO. Which bounty manager with mind will take the scam project bounty campaign for ruining his reputation?

depends on the manager  . some writes a disclaimer or a notice before they start a campaign that they are not responsible if what happens with the campaign while other managers didnt bother to write this stuff's . if the campaign turns unto scam or wont pay . he/she the manager is and the campaign owner are both responsible for that .


many managers on this forum did that before , idk if there are still manager that do this silly things . they risk thier reputation for a huge pay on the campaign that they manage  .

The kyc issue has really been delibrated on here I wish there was a way to pass it accross to the appropriate quarters, bounty hunters should be left out of Kyc, most hunters don't even have complete requirement for kyc,and they get to know about kyc after the bounty is ended, which is bad.

I don't see the need for bounty managers undergoing KYC and o always say as a bounty hunter, if you can't do KYC, simply stay away from any project that requires it and save yourself the stress

bounty manager must do KYC ??? although the bounty manager does not do KYC, of course the team will say if the bounty manager has also done KYC, this is all a game ... and if we are able to do KYC please join if not then stay away from the project

I think its much better to apply KYC for Bounty Managers in this forum so that they will be trusted by bounty hunters. We should have something like in the forum, so that the true and honest bounty managers will succeed in this industry and at the same time it lessen the scam/fraud projects because they will trusted bounty managers will not accept shady or scam projects.

even though not a bounty hunter investor, I have to do KYC, in my opinion, because there are so many who have the same double account to avoid money laundering because now there are so many double accounts for Nuyul.

Kyc should be done for the team bounty manager and possibly bounty hunter, it is fair that way. It's illogical to ask for kyc from bounty hunters if the team and bounty manager aren't interested to do kyc.

They are just over expanding this issue of KYC, there is absolutely no relationship between hunters and KYC, KYC is to be used as tools for those who are willing to make a heavy investment that requires moving a large sum of money. Which money does hunter have to move rather than the one they are hoping to get from the campaign, and if they sure the one paying the hunter the money, why do they still need KYC for them to move the fund.

I wish IEO platforms can really have provision to use the services of hunters too, it would have been easier, has most IEO projects do not request for JYC again, since it is already being asked by the exchanges controlling the project.

I agree with you it is not fair that we submit KYC we are just bounty hunters not investors, I always think that most bounty campaigns that needs KYC are scams.

Only few good bounty campaign in a bounty thread now a days most of them are not paying, unable to reach softcap and it ends with nothing the last is scam. So i may say its not fair for bounty hunters to do KYC. It should be exempted in submitting requirements.

Don't forget that most times not bounty managers distribute the rewards for bounty so I don't think making kyc compulsory for them is in anyway relevant. All what bounty managers usually do is to manage the campaign and present the spreadsheet to the team for distribution.

If a bounty platform ensures the KYC details are secure then there is no harm in providing it but there is no need of KYC for Bounty managers .

 :'( It is a very important topic for any project or company in the present time. In the amount of hacks that started, it seems that very soon the investors will worry about their investment. So, I think the KYC needs to be filled in the KYC to not allow hacker to crack or unknowingly.

We need to remember more about the opportunities that arise when someone else has your personal data.  I don’t know how to. How can my passport data be abused, but with certain documents and important figures, they can gain access to certain accounts that are associated with cryptocurrency.  We must be sure of the safety of our passport data, and we must know To whom we give them.

Even now many projects have asked to do KYC but the project is not clear where the road is going and even entering the stock market there is no news, whether our data is safe or not, it can be misused.

Though I didn't support the idea of bounty managers requesting kyc from bounty hunters for bounty campaign but I think we shouldn't be dragging this because I think its optional except for few exception when they didn't announce from the get go that kyc is required, bounty hunters should choose either to participate in bounty with kyc or not.

The only KYC requirement for bounty managers should be their integrity, reputation and performance in previous campaigns. Aside this, I don't think they should be required to pass KYC just like it is totally irrelevant asking bounty hunters to pass KYC.

Indeed, for the bounty it is now very difficult to choose, I just just followed the bounty handled by the former bounty manager, ColorlessK now he have a bounty platform and have some interesting bounties except that not all guarantee but it's better, than the New bounty manager who offers rewards with projects that don't make sense

is the OP hearing himself in the first place? kyc requirement is decided by the project team themselves and not the bounty manager.
so when a bounty mgr accepted the job, and posted the requirements, it is mandated by the project and not on his own disposition.
if the bounty mgr is receiving his compensation in terms of the project's token, then i would say more than likely he needs to undergo the kyc reqmt also. but its none of our business
if you dont want a bounty program requiring kyc, then by all means you are free to go. but minding someone else's business?  ::)

Reputation and past performance, This is a really must check before joining the campaign.

We should also check the payment timeline in his/her previous bounty campaign. A delay bounty payments is usually a failure of bounty manager to make a follow up for his employers or worst he failed to submit the bounty results on time.

In this day in age, information is the new currency. KYC is a way for big companies to collect information from users. And now they have bounty hunters...

To be honest, I do not subscribe to the idea of bounty hunters submitting a KYC before receiving their reward. Things are now changing. Who knows what could actually be done with those info?

Know Your Customer as a security check is just to ensure that blockchain companies get to know their customers to avoid any form of theft. So I don't think bounty hunters are supposed to undergo KYC because they are only offering their services for a short while and once the project has successfully completed its token sales they get paid. I think KYC should be stopped for bounty hunters.

Every time I send my ID it feels very unfair. Because as a bounty hunter we can only make a little money. Sometimes we also get fake projects. But if it has become policy, of course, we cannot do much. So KYC really has to be done and my advice before you send your ID is better to check.

If the ICO bounty campaign manager shows us his data and passport copies, it will not reduce the likelihood of fraud by the ICO team. Even if the manager of the bounty campaign is a member of the ICO team, he can use someone else's passport and other people's data, as many of us do right when passing these illegal KYC checks.
The problem of fraud among ICO projects can be solved only by government regulation of this type of activity. This can eradicate or at least significantly reduce the amount of fraud among such projects. Any other form of ICO command control will be ineffective.

Virtually everyone do not really see the reasons why KYC should be demanded from hunters, and that is also part of the reasons why they are not meeting up with hardcap aside the scam issue, because the number of investors that would not agree to do KYC on this sites are still greater than the number of investors that will go by the KYC.

secondly, the number of hunters who would participate in campaigns with KYC is lower to the number of people who would not participate in campaigns asking for KYC. Majority of these unnecessary requirements should really be set aside, because it is not working, despite all their KYC requirements, they still cannot bring out ne single scammer.

I do not see anything wrong with passing KYC, the most important thing is that my personal data should not be with the bad guys,
and the project turned out to be popular and promising.

I think it is a good idea. Because sometimes some bounty manager are the problem so many bounty hunters did not give hunter's salary. So bounty hunters did not know who or did not know any identity about bounty manager so they persecute and to make complain because there in no profile. So for me it is good to give a KYC to bounty manager.

Read the topic post again. You are missing from the topic a lot.

---

It doesn't depends upon amount actually. It's just that business usually skips those who holds small amounts.

Kyc is not a good idea, I don't see it as something that should be made compulsory for hunters to claim their bounty rewards, I see as a way of denying hunters their reward, so it should be stopped

I really don't see any meaning in the KYC requirement. KYC requirement to me is like a waste of precious because these ICOs are not regulated by any authority but they do claim that they already got license from a particular country ministry of finance or whatever but in actually sense they are all liars and the KYCs they request doesn't go anywhere.

Most are true, that bounty hunters don't like this. Because sometimes KYC is also complicated by those who do it. That's why most bounty hunters don't like that. But actually we as bounty hunters cannot do anything unless we have to get the token. If not we will lose what we did, so look for a bounty that doesn't do kyc. And ask the project group before participating.

1. to sell fresh scans on the black market
2. as few people as possible pay the bounty remaining to sell or distribute to themselves.
3. just because they can
4. no one knows the law and ithey afraid that they will not be go in jail

As a bounty hunter, personally I hate the idea of this KYC of a thing, but saying bounty managers should also submit KYC is a bit complicated because I don't know who they are going to submit to. 

It is clear that it is better to look for projects without KYC, but the rules of the companies always say that they can change them at their discretion.  Already several times faced with this on personal experience.

I believe that if bounty hunters are required to do KYC, investors must do it as well. Otherwise it makes absolutely no sense, and I agree with you that if one party should do KYC, all other involved parties must do the same.

one problem for bounty hunter is they can cheating the campaign by using multi account or spamming the campaign that's why BM need KYC for hunter.

like i agree with you Bounty manager is need to submit kyc to developer, but as i can see BM from some bounty management service is trusted, that's why i never suspect them if it from trusted manager

This always have been a subject which have induced much discussion in community.
You have a good point but consider if the token is a subject to laws that require all holders to be identified ,then it doe snot matter if you are a investor or not.

Exactly my fear.. Why do they have to get us go through that is actually frustrating for crying out loud. It's even fair with bounty campaigns that have it clearly stated out from the inception, so anyone not comfortable would have opted not joining. In sharp contrast to this are those who at the very end will start telling faithful bounty supporters there is a mandatory kyc for rewards payment.

I assume all bounty managers already presented some docs to the project team before they handle their bounty programs, no team will let someone unknown to them handle their bounty programs and email addresses of the participants. If you mean you want the bounty manager be known personally to the participants, there's a problem there, he will receive lots of personal messages in social medias trying to make up for something or to get special treatment from him,

How do they know that you are not cheating on their bounty. Because so many people have done so to earn money from bounty

Even though that it may seem so unfair because like you said that we are not investors, but we respect what the bounty manager requires us to do. Because we also are considered as a token holder. And some of the bounty hunters are making some multiple accounts in order to cheat, so KYC was very helpful on that part.

Bounty manager is not at fault but project team, bounty manager can't mandate kyc for bounty participants, the team must have requested for it through the manager.
If this will be required from the bounty then the team should start doing a public kyc before requesting money from ico participants.

First of all, I don't like the idea of KYC in both situations. But i  case bounty managers asking for KYC in bounty hunters, this is a great idea to ask for their KYC also especially knowing that there are not so good bounty managers. This I think would be fair.

Well, i think it is not necessary to requiring KYC for bounty manager, if they are a trusted manager here in this forum.
The one we must verify is not only the bounty manager, but the ICO as well whether they real or fraud.
Participating in a fraud ICO bounty is same as wasting your time and efforts for nothing.

I cannot understand this as well, because some projects require KYC only for bounty participants, however investors could stay anonymous. This is just silly, because such teams want to share smaller rewards with their bounty participants.

Before they asked their bounty participants to do KYC, they already did that on their investors. Investors should be do KYC before they buying their token during ICO, so there is no any of their investors who stay anonymous.
Yea, but my advice just stay away from any project which require you to do KYC, because you don't know what will they do with your information

I agree with the proposal, however, the manager's bounty must also use cyc so that the data is more transparent and adheres to a system of openness for all participants so that they know they are in the right hands

It was really fair for me. Because lately most of the bounty hunters are making some duplicate accounts just to get double, triple rewards in the conclusion of the campaign, and its unfair for those hunters that are not. So kyc was great in order to filter out some dummy accounts in bounty hunter.

What do you do people having multiple accounts? He will ask his friends to provide documents or steal them, or worse, he will buy documents on the black market. Of course, some amount of such participants will be eliminated, but many will remain managing to go through the procedure of personal identification. Because of this, I find the KYC is not an effective method of selection.

I said that many times, we need a trustworthy company that will manage KYC for all ICO, IEO, STO  and exchange participants (users). Someone who will bring a trust into this system. It can´t be done by a random person..  :-\

I don't like KYC either but i guess bounty managers sometimes request this when the realize that there have been so many participants in their campaign cheating. Well if you also hate it that much then i guess the best you can do is to stay away from such campaigns. There are still a whole bunch of campaigns that does not require KYC.

Bounty managers have nothing to do with KYC implementation for nay bounty , the project teams are the ones that make that decision not the bounty managers

Here you are mistaken, there are some managers who ask to go through the KYC without the knowledge of the project.

It can't agree to that, it's a tough job for random person to secure this KYC procedures but if there's a system that will be able to do the process it would
be nice and it will be much easier, the question still remain, who's going to be behind it and how they can do it in the right way for people to entrust their
personal informations.

KYC is used to add money laundering. This is a great solution for Bounty managers to pass through KYC. For Bounty hunters, I think this is indeed very fair. But all the decisions to use KYC are in their hands. For me, KYC is not a problem and most importantly the project can be successful.

Doing KYC for this kind of things is very risky because there's a lot of reason that could happen to our information which it can sell to black market for bucks or stored it somewhere else and use it on their own shits

The ID is very important for Bounty hunters. Because it is data that can not be learned by others. And I'm sure if these managers understand it. But this every project certainly has different policies. And you'll have the right to reject it but you won't get paid. And it also I experienced but for a good project, I would certainly do KYC in accordance with the policy of the project.

yeah i agree with KYC to bounty hunter is making a bad effect because ID is so private.
but your question is looking you blame BM, BM is same like us guys.
he work and get paid same like us, we must respect him.

I strongly agree that the Bounty manager is the same as us. If participating in a bounty project, of course, that means we already believe in BM without having to do the BM doing KYC. The problem is the bounty hunter who does KYC in every project. It doesn't hurt but if the project is not good and doing a bounty I don't think it will do that.

Look at jinbi and how much bounty hunters have sent their KYC and they are getting deceived by the company. Remember KYC data is a very sensitive date and especially for EU. I thought that not so many companies wanna deal with GDPR.

Yes, you are right, the KYC process is only for investors, not for bounty hunters, but if your question leads to the gift manager to fill the first KYC, I think you are wrong, because the manager is instructed with project owners to carry out KYC procedures to get tokens . So basically the procedure must be really done for that.

Various bounties not demanding KYC and some bounties requirement of KYC is compulsory due to their countries regulations and also you will see in future every bounty will ask about KYC for join bounties.

I guess thats slightly true. Its very risky sending your personal information to someone you don't even know and you don't really know if it is safe. On the other hand, its one way to identify bounty hunters who are enrolling multiple accounts in the campaign and those people who are trying to cheat or in short, those people who are greedy.

I will not join any projects that require KYC. Because it's really important to protect your personal information on the Internet. You don't know if the project manager or team is trustworthy. You never know what they will do with our personal information.

That's right. As a rule, the team goes through the identification procedure on the rating platforms, and if it is so, then it is logical that they want the procedure to pass from their employees.

This is quite hilarious and will be difficult to enforce because as a bounty hunter or airdopper, you don't make the rules and you cannot dictate you your employer terms best for them to work with. However, what is good for the goose might also be good for the gander for transparency sake.

I really think the requirement for kyc is the bounty manager's fault, most of them do it because it is required by the project team, also I am wondering who the bounty manager would even submit to.

yeah i agree. It's not worth for bounty hunters to submit KYC since we just received a little money to to that. But i think they ask bounty hunters to do the KYC to minimize the cheaters who abusing their campaign. So, maybe the KYC is the solution.

since bounty reward value decreased alot caused by cheaters now kyc neede to reduce it.if bounty manager or developers team didnt do this i am not sure bounty reward will have high value in market.everyone has many tokens from their work.so just decided it by ourself, will we do this or not.

I agree with this idea of using KYC as a requirement to minimize certain issues but I am putting more emphasis of requiring KYC to the core members of  the project itself. Maybe you could check my related thread about KYC for further idea about this topic.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5150729.msg51348454#msg51348454

Well, even if bounty manager will jot make the kyc they have done public for people to confirm, I still believe in past successful projects and integrity. Integrity us very important, because it is what will keep a going manger going and not the kyc he has done.

Nowadays, some of project need kyc requirements for participants after the project end. And tbh I don't know too why they need our kyc?
Like you said we're not investor and just a bounty hunter, so why they must need our kyc identification?

It is not the only a problem of the bounty hunters, but it is also a kinda concerning problem for the bounty managers and the team. If it was not mandatory I am sure no one will send his personal documents to the unknown team for the few cents worth tokens. The ones who can't make proper research before joining the token sale whitelist will not be awarded by the team. Scammers are wise and we need to educate the brand-new crypto investors

This would be a good policy for the industry to adopt especially as it will encourage more transparency for bounty managers and this should also be done by the project team itself to ensure that everything is legitimate before launching a campaign

KYC is now very often used for bounty hunters. And I think the use of KYC is not wrong just we have to be careful. It is better to do research and examine the project. If the project is experiencing a very good development, of course, we can do KYC. I am not worried about sending my personal data and so far there is no problem.

If I'm the bounty manager, I don't like to give my KYC to anybody because it can affect what I'm doing. Same with the bounty managers out there. One more, why would the bounty hunters join in a bounty campaigns that requires KYC. If they can risk their personal information for the sake of a small money then go I don't care and vice versa.

In the internet, nobody is trustworthy so how can you be so sure that your information will not be used into bad things? This is why I don't want to give my personal information to the people that I don't know personally.

It sounds weird if there was KYC requirement too for Bounty Managers.. Bounty managers will do professionally managing bounty and calculating stakes for bounty participants because I think if they didn't do that correctly , they will not getting paid from ICO team.. And I'm worried what ICO team do if already had your personal data.
But if effectively for some "recommended and good" ICO which launched bounty campaign and put KYC rules before getting bounty rewards , it will make bounty participant can't register with multiple account for cheating bounty rewards.

I always believe on the anonymity of cryptocurrency as one of its founding factors that help people be away from the "evils" of fiat currency. If bounty managers demand a Know your Customer campaign before they give the bounties then I will not participate. I demand being asked if there is KYC or if there is no KYC on the bounties that I join then I join them. If they say KYC AFTER the bounty has been finished then that for me is malicious and misleading.

There are bounties that doesn't require kyc during the campaign. And when the campaign ends, they requires you to do the kyc. And it's compulsory because you won't be able to get your reward without kyc. You'll be forced to give them your personal info. They will tell you they don't require kyc, but after the campaign ends, they will change their rules. And you can't do anything about it.

There is really no point in making bounty managers go through KYC process ,doing so won't state the fact about how professional they are in their work ,all they do is mark and regulate a bounty ,devs and teams are the ones forcing KYC on hunters not bounty managers,its never bounty managers call to make

I've always had the same thoughts as you, because in my opinion it makes a lot of sense, no one wants to entrust his business to an unclear bounty manager, we as bounty hunters also need to know the real profile of the bounty manager so that everything becomes transparent

You're right to be cautious about submitting KYC information, particularly when there are so many scams about.
In general though I think the KYC requirements are just companies being ultra-cautious and trying to stay on the right side of what are often vague or uncertain legal requirements.

If you're not comfortable submitting any of your documents, well you are free not to apply in it. No one is forcing you to do it, that's why you will see some bounty threads from the starts they already declared if there is KYC or No KYC, so that the bounty hunters or Investors are aware of it, but  if the KYC will only be announce after the campaign or in the midst of the campaign, I can call it that is one of the stupid stupid project campaign in my opinion only.

I think no one wants to reveal personal information to others, but the problem here is that bounty hunter's KYC is not against money laundering, but to limit cheaters, although it is not very effective.

some bounty campaign changes their rules about KYC when campaign ended.and it depend to us ,will we continue this process or not to receive our bounty campaign.i am sure changes rules in the end of campaign will make bounty hunter surprise.especially for them that not to be honest.

I agree. by making regulations at the beginning of the campaign, I think this is fair, because there is no element of fraud. but if it is held in the middle of an ongoing campaign, of course makes us think of sending it, even though the team can change the rules.

I understand how you feel, the virtual world can always give us a lot of risks when we provide too much information for it, especially in the field of crypto, personal information is always a very important thing, it is a shield to protect our property, revealing to others that will harm our selves. Therefore, not only the manager of the bounty campaign, almost everyone dislikes the request for KYC, instead of having such excessive requests, they should ask for simple information as a real account to be able to talk and negotiate with each other, the bounty manager will never refuse this request

many bounty hunters may not believe in the existence of KYC but maybe it can be used as a way to do the Kyc for the bounty manager first and then do the bounty participants to be fair

Yes handing over KYC which information about yourself is a contentious issue. However you do not expect bounty managers to go through same processes like you because they are already known and it's for that very reason they are handling the project coordination and management instead of you .

However I understand your pains as a fellow bounty hunter. Invariably it's left for you to do such projects or not.

KYC are not just being implemented by bounty managers but also the project managers depending on the ICO. As you can see different projects require different information and there are projects that would require you to put your personal information in their platform. This can be seen quite often inf airdrops or bounty campaigns that would send your rewards in the account that you made with their platform.

Bounty hunters can do nothing, it will depend on the team and the project some managers receive different payments some receive the token of the campaign and some paid on BTC/ETH.

If a campaign manager doesnt want to submit KYC because he wants to remain unknown he can easily dont accept the bounty, so in short bounty participants have nothing to do with this thing, if you dont want to submit KYC like others then dont join on campaigns that requires KYC.

You are right. I am going to have a look with you. Hunter works and some managers kill him payment. I am not saying all the hanter is good. It is also correct by doing some hanter mischief. However yes KYC i think hanter and bounty manager all Need.

They have to do KYCs in some specific bounties in order to get payments. It does not solely depend on bounty participants, but also mandatory required by bounties managers/ companies which run those bounties. I don't like to do KYCs with bounties, because I don't know they will use my identities for unknow purposes.

Having a KYC system can open up the people that has a illegal motive to crypto, and I think its better and would be more accurate to the hunters to trust such manager, and so hunters will be following the exact doing by bounty managers.

You have a good point in there mate,In some point, but also bounty managers need to filter real people from cheaters so they can just give the right bounty rewards for real people. If this was actually a risk for you or to others  then you should not be participating in some bounty that has a KYC system.

Doing KYC has a big risk in my opinion. I better ignore this if the website does not guarantee data security.
Don't use KYC for airdrop that's very suspicious.

I think KYC should take place at the end of the bonus program. This is good for the project and bounty hunter removes spam and bots.

Yes and the only way to get the reward is to either submit your personal documents and picture and then get their reward or fight back and diss them all over the internet. Changing the rules in the middle of the bounty is for one very unethical. Bounty hunters should ready to give up their bounties and fight back when opportunistic bounty managers tend to bend the rules and add more to the existing mechanism.

As a company, I believe that they will consider more to continuously work with bounty managers. It takes time if they change manager. While since it is far away from them, they have to check the background to know more. Know more means that they trust more and grant more tasks and money. While that I can understand that they check the manager leaders rather than the hunters.

KYC checking bounty managers will not solve any problems for bounty hunters. In many cases, this is the same hired worker. Even if the ICO bounty manager is a member of the ICO team, he can pass through the KYC test as many of us go through - providing not his own data and not his personal document. It would be better if such a check will be carried out by the ICO team, and even better if their documents are checked by the relevant government authorities during registration at the ICO location.

I believe that KYC for bounty managers will help to reduce fraud on their part . Have you never got into a situation when the bounty manager did not fulfill his direct duties? If you have already decided to hold KYC, then let it be mandatory for absolutely all campaign participants, including the organizers

I think most of these campaigns enforce the KYC rule for bounty hunters just so they can be able to weed the genuine participants from the bots, although I enjoy my privacy a bit too much and I don't like sharing my IDs at all.

Of a bounty manager is asked to do kyc or not, nobody will know that, except the project team decides to disclose that themselves. There are also situations where some bounty managers themselves decide to ask for kyc, purposely to their selfish gain and for ulterior motives. Learn to choose the manager to work with, because it is very important.

but my question is "is there a project that has asked for bounty manager to do kyc" because all this time I have never heard of it and if you don't feel comfortable doing KYC you should look for another project

Doesn't make sense to me,why would bounty managers have to go through KYC process for conducting bounty projects? Bounty managers job is to mark and submit bounty hunters work when bounty ends so i don't see any reason

I feel that in general the KYC feature will not bring in as much holders compared to not having it. It just doesn't make any sense for people to do a KYC nearly a month or so before a coin goes on an exchange where KYC is not needed. Most coins don't pump high enough for people to make double the amount of money within that time-frame anyhow.

Bounty managers should not have to do a KYC for a coin.

At some point this is possible for managers based in Bitcointalk, but we need to understand that some projects, they choose the member of the team to handle the bounty campaign, so its not that requirement for them, since they own the project themselves, but logically for bounty hunters it helps us build confidence if the bounty manager is of high rank in this forum, we feel safe from our efforts of promoting project.

For me, the KYC in the bounty inconvenience and I do not participate in such campaigns. Much worse when the passage of the KYC is announced at the end of the bounty or after the end of the campaign.

KYC submission for bounty hunters have become necessary because of the activities of some hunters who delight in nothing but cheating the project and planning to make a quick money from the project thereby killing the project, to curb this, KYC may be introduce after bounty campaign or at the beginning. Some persons are just too fraudulent and careless about the success of the project.

Yups, thats true, many people using fake account for referral bounty. Using KYC maybe stopping them. But, we are as bounty hunter need to know, what happen with our  document if the projects being scam.

sell it to people who need our data, maybe.
but if not then it will not be used for anything. they only give us a busy life as if they will still pay us, and then they run away.

If you don't believe them (the project) you should not participate. Because most projects are now mandatory for KYC prizes. And KYC for bounty hunters is also to reduce cheating people who use multiple accounts in every bounty.

I also share your sentiment because I also do not but the idea to requiring kyc from bounty hunters before getting their bounty reward. Then back to main topic, bounty managers even need more than kyc, other verifications that can prove their integrity should also be demanded before being allowed to manage any bounty.

I think the bounty manager does the same KYC as the bounty hunters do, for them to have the payment on their work.
If the project team requires the KYC and then it will go through all of the participants, and to tell they are the same as the hunters.

As a bounty hunter we can not ask KYC from the bounty manager and he is not bound to give us. Its totally depend on us whether to provide our KYC or not. Where KYC demanded we have no choice to give it otherwise we will loose our reward. Most of us are not happy to provide our docs that can be misused. We can only hope that our docs will not be misused. Ultimately you have to provide it if you want to receive your rewards.

you made a lot of sense in your post. Most of these projects are known scams. yet they requested for KYC which is certain that they will end up selling people information and claiming they failed to reach a successful hardcap when the aim of the whole project has been achieved which collecting people ID. Most Managers are not aware of this sudden change until it is made known to them.

IF I become a bounty manger which i am aspiring to be, any project that failed to request for KYC in the beginning of the bounty campaign will loose every bounty reports if they decided to request for KYC at the end of the bounty. i will cancel and trash every reports and also order participants to delete information about the project from their account.
bounty managers need to stick to their polices.

KYC of bounty manager will ensure that at least the project is not scam. If they need KYC of bounty Hunter to ensure that no one become greedy , so before that , they should prove that they are not scammers.

You are right before collecting our documents they need to prove themselves they are very good company. We have seen many companies are becoming scam once after raising the money without any developments.

You are right, it is related to one's personal data and it is strongly recommended to read the rules before you continue the next step in a campaign and it all depends on how the inisation from a manager  to manage a project whether KYC is deemed necessary or not.

KYC should not be being asked for in the first place. They just average joes, not government officials and I don't know if you are aware of this but collecting KYC is a bussniss. The dump all that info on the darkweb for example (probably clear web too) then marketers or advertisers will buy that info.

Best case senary is your info is being sold or was just forgotten.

Worst case is someone steals your identity and you end up in jail. Or you ger murdered by a lunatic.

ONLY GIVE KYC TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS!!!

Nobody knows what happens behind the scenes and I believe that projects are communicating with bounty managers not only with help of telegram or BTT, but personally as well. Moreover, if team does not want to share rewards with all hunters, they just implement the KYC.

I'm not sure what BMC information we need to do. Because BM is also the only person hired to manage bounty, and the final decision is still from the project team. So I think we just need to check the team information.

I think KYC for bounty managers is also needed, because it is not only the bounty manager who is required to get to know bounty hunters by doing KYC, but bounty hunters also need to know who the bounty manager is by doing KYC, because it is very important for the integrity of the bounty manager

We all need to think like this because as much as I know after submission of KYC number of scamming cases has reduced and now in market scamming is almost finished. So asking KYC in market is only because of our own security. I am also happy to submit my account verifications as there is nothing bad in it.

      If kyc is included in the rules then that's fair enough since you're already aware at the start so you have the time to decide if you want to join or not , otherwise this is one way of showing the  legitimacy of the project , even you are not an investor but you're part of the team.

If the KYC is also applied to the Bounty manager I think it's a great idea. But as long as this is not the case and the project using KYC tends to be unsuccessful. For me actually submitting personal data is not a problem. As long as the project has good potential and has professional developers.

Noone should be asking you for your KYC in the first place. They don't use official KYC companies that will protect your data. YOu giving your KYC directly to the dev and thats a big no no.

Projects asking for KYC stay away from. Even ICO that want KYC is ridiculous.

If you ever have to give your KYC it will be to somewhere like localbitcoins. Localbitcoins has a proper KYC company that keeps peoples info safe. localbitcoins do not see the KYC only the KYC company. Only one pair of eyes ever see your info. Once you pass that is it. You done forever.

Mostly the Team project will go to known bounty managers, why they need to do KYC.
And, If the bounty managers did KYC! how do we know if they really did? only the team who manage the KYC knows that.
So what is the purpose? as kyc  documents cannot be post in public!

In the 100% prize campaign project, 60% I found a gift campaign that requires bounty hunters to send KYC to get rewards. This number can be wrong.
For me, this is something unexpected for me as you mentioned. But I see from the side of the role and the task of the bounty hunter, so I just followed every rule needed during the campaign.

Basically doing KYC for a bounty hunter is not needed moreover on Bounty manager. Seriously, the managers doing KYC for what??
But I'm sure that the only thing that they doing KYC is to kill all those multi-accounts abusers.

this is one reason why i don't want to share my KYC to untrusted bounty manager, ut if i know the person from bounty management services or bounty manager personal with positif feedback from bitcointalk member i don't worry anymore

When we launch Nyancash next month, we have to follow all the regulations here in Canada. We have a trusted firm that will be handling our KYC info, so when FINTRAC needs any information, our compliance officer can work with the firm and the government to provide any information they need. We want to run a exchange, and Buy and Sell Bitcoin/Ethereum. We really don't want people's info and but we want to comply with all the rules, so we felt a third party is best to manage that information and keep it safe. They can take care of that, we can take care of providing dividends to token holders. www.nyancash.com

You should protect your private data and even sharing it with companies is risky because they can be hacked and leak it like Facebook did. Sharing it with some anonymous bounty managers on this forum is much worse and can lead to your data being sold on dark web markets. I'm sure you don't want that.

Even if the manager is trusted it doesn't mean anything. They get trust ratings because they pay up for their bounties. You won't know if they leaked your data until it's too late.

if you dont trust about kyc, just dont do it. just follow bounty that dont require kyc.
kyc is useful for big company, they know and can do something if there some player cheat. and maybe it happen to bounty manager. not only company, but you need to know about bounty manager, it trusted or not.

This KYC issues have been raised here time without number and I don't think it's the only way to make projects successful. If investors are going through I don't think it's mandatory for a bounty hunter to do same. One thing I have seen concerning these KYC issues is that, they do it to make checks in their projects concerning people cheating.

Project asks KYC to avoid scammers who join bounties, and right if KYC can reduce scammers, if you ask bounty manager to do KYC means bounty manager is scammers :D

Kyc is not a must, if you don't want to do KYC just stay away from projects that requires it and focuse on those that doesn't need it and as for Bounty Mangers undergoing KYC, I don't see it as necessary

If you don't want to deal with KYC, don't deal with it. It's not like you are really missing out on much, there will always be the next 100 bounties you can join in on without it. All projects at this point are scams anyway, whether they intend to be or not, the glory days are long gone. Go spend time doing something productive, rather than dreaming you're valueless tokens will magically be worth gold.

Many people say that charity personal data is very risky. But there are already many Bounty projects that use KYC and many participants who do KYC. But this project with KYC sometimes has a very weak developer. So many KYC projects can stop in the middle of the road.

If you feel uncomfortable with the Bounty Manager who tells you to do KYC, you just leave it and don't have to participate in the project.  Because KYC is done to avoid people who will cheat in the Bounty.  That is by participating in the Bounty campaign with many accounts, and it is very detrimental to other participants who are honest by participating in only one account.

I don't support the act of bounty hunters going through KYC before they can get their token since the KYC/AML rules is only applicable applicable to investors.

Every bounty manager or default trust members have different reason why they were giving the green trust.

From my experience, in 90% of the time it is the ICO promoters who try to scam the bounty hunters. The bounty manager is a scapegoat in many cases. Unless the promoters give him the tokens, he can't distribute them to the bounty hunters. It is a double whammy for the campaign managers. First his effort goes unpaid. On top of that, he has to confront the angry bounty hunters now.

I think the KYC process is annoying for bounty hunters, There are many who prefer to join bounties that do not ask for KYC, I think the fair bounty is just asking KYC to prevent fraud by some people who use more than one account to double their stakes in the campaigns of the bounty, However, the percentage of bounty is not large in the total supply of the tokens of the project, This shows that the project will not be affected by this fraud which will happen in the bounty, All projects should not require KYC from the bounty hunters and make it only for investors and the project team.

Kyc rules isn't set by bounty managers these are rules by the core project team. It isn't fair to keep blaming managers they're working under directives from the project team. Kyc shouldn't be required for bounty hunters because they're not investors but I thi k it's a means of reducing multiple accounts in bounties.

In my opinion, despite the fact that kyc has been instrumental to the reduction of multiple accounts for bounty hunters, I still believe that it is not meant to be utilized for bounties. The bounty hunters is not purchasing tokens and the tokens received are earned from carrying out services for the project.

To be honest I don't really mind the policy as long as in the end the bounty hunter still gets full rights (token) because in my opinion KYC is also very useful to reduce fraud such as multi-accounts that can harm other bounty hunters and KYC is not so difficult, so there is no problem with that
this is just my opinion

It will be fine as long as bounty hunters will get their rewards as promised. The only danger there is if the project gets their database hacked or they choose to sell it to behind our backs. That is the major problem of surrendering to kyc. How do we trust these project owners?

I don't think bounty managers need to submit KYC, because most of the bounty manager was a bounty hunter first and they can feel our stress and pain. But bounty manager has nothing to do on the team. It is the team who ask KYC for the bounty hunters, so we need to ask the project manager or the team to come with a KYC. I don't know how the Icobecbh KYC works because some project passed the Icobench KYC.

Its simple, just don't promote any project that ask for KYC, many bounty projects with no KYC will still find their way to crypto space no matter what, all you have to do is avoid projects that ask for KYC, presently there are few bounty projects that have no KYC implemented

I don't quite get why KYC is required for most bounties, since bounties typically don't hold any value to start with. So it's equivalent to giving someone digital monopoly money worth exactly $0. So how does that relate to money laundering exactly? Why would anyone care if you are giving away something worthless and there is no fund transfer, so nothing could possibly be laundered?

And of course most bounties tend to range from $0 to like $50 ... we aren't talking about Walter White level of money transfers here...

I wonder if a lot of campaigns request KYC simply because they are running presales or ICOs, or whatever, and expect bounty people to buy into their coin? Then KYC would be required, but I expect 99%+ of bounty people are after free coin and are not looking to invest.

If it were so simple, indeed, there would be no particular problems with the KYC verification. However, they exist, and very large. Many ICO teams introduce such a check after the end of the ICO and they are interested in preventing the participants in the ICO bounty campaign from passing it, and therefore use various methods of fraud. Some even directly deny the possibility of such a check, but during the ICO or even after its completion they change their minds. Therefore, simply bypassing campaigns that will not conduct KYC verification does not always work.
I hope that after the new FATF rules regarding cryptocurrency, including the rules on conducting KYC, come into force from June 21 of next year, we will reduce these problems.

I really see no reason for Kyc and that is why one should ask if there is kyc or not before joining a bounty campaign. Also why would the bounty Manager be asked to do KYC? You think the Kyc is imposed by them? they are only arriving according to directives of the project team.

At present KYC is a requirement for participants to get paid, but in my opinion this is not reasonable because with the reasons of money laundering I think it is impossible that can be done by bounty participants, but if KYC is only applied to investors, in my opinion reasonable thing because a lot of money invested by them, now my question is, if a project has been completed and kyc has been done, we will send data to the team / manager of the bounty, whether the data will be used by them or the data be stored on a secure server or will the data be destroyed by them after the project is finished?

If there is no KYC, preventing the scam applicants becomes hard for the bounty managers. Teams hire the bounty hunters and the bounty managers are supposed to do the clean job during the management of the bounty campaigns. Asking a KYC will reduce the cheaters and bounty abusers, otherwise, the scammers will use steal the articles from the other forum members. We have seen similar cases in the past bounty campaigns but now the rules are strictly protected thanks to the proper management by the reputable bounty managers. The stake counting is the easy part of the whole story, many things turn at the backside of the door and the shady bounty participants don't hesitate to defend their rights after getting caught during the KYC request.

Your argument is plausible but I think financial regulation requires some level of kyc for all stakeholders. The rule in mainstream banking I think holds in crypto-currencies

I agree with you, KYC is a statutory requirement by law to prevent fraud and money laundering. Its a fiscal law set in place to ensure a safe economic space. I Don not see any reasons to decline kyc too irrespective of the party involved as long as the kyc third party company is reputable

Maybe the stringent requirements should be lowered both for bounty managers and the hunter but kyc in my opinion is necessary for all involved in this ecosystem

If you feel that it is unfair on your end and you think that you can implement the same rules to the manager, stop thinking like that.
It's not going to happen, managers have their own responses to KYC and they have no obligation to do that as for their participants request. Don't join a bounty if you felt that it's been unfair for you.

Absolutely, bounty managers don't want to do KYC for participants because it takes too much time and trouble. They only follow the requirements of the project

I don't like projects that require KYC because I don't want to send personal information to untrusted people.
When meeting a project asking Kyc I simply ignored it.

I dont think if it will work, it is bettet if the team behind the project will do it first before the bounty manager and those participants, basically the team are those who will decide if they going to pay if the project gone successfully meaning they should be the one who will put their true identity first before anyone.

You have to understand that they do it to minimize the acts of fraud that occur. Like doing a multi-account for participate in 1 bounty. That's obviously not fair, because each person only has one share. Such requirements are also sometimes at the request of the project itself to avoid fraud that harms the project. Bounty and airdrop are made as a promotional media, if they are misallocated to greedy people, then they do not benefit from the bounties they hold.

No, this is not required at all. KYC information is not asking by the bounty managers, it's come from the team. Bounty manager is not the decision-maker to add KYC requirements for the bounty hunters! You should raise a question about the project's KYC, not for the bounty manager!

I think people do feel uncomfortable about their data being given to strangers. but, all the choices depend on yourself. however, the bounty manager must have his own agreement with the team, I chose not to interfere in such matters. 100% of the decision to give KYC is yours, so choose a project that you truly believe will be successful, and be sure to ask whether the project requires KYC or not. I am pretty sure that BM also provided their own data.

I strongly agree that everyone involved in the project or project ecosystem is required by KYC, so that we can all know that all parties involved in a project are very real, be it managers, hunters, and project teams.

Same here, I dont like to send my ID's on some projects as well. I'm not really comfortable, what if they will sell it or use it on illegal activities. But I think bounty managers should submit KYC here in bitcointalk before they launch a campaign so that we are comfortable in participating in their campaign.

I think you're not the only who feel that way, there are many of you actually. There are some project now were you can see on the bounty thread if there is KYC or not the BM indicated it already so that bounty participants, will not be able to attempt to ask regarding about KYC. Even no matter how we hate it, we can refuse of that rules and policy. But sometimes there are some BM that are not transparent, from the start there is no kyc then after the main sales end all of a sudden they will implement KYC for them to receive bounty rewards, for me that BM or team of project are cheaters, liar and greedy.

 don't need to do it because I think byc for a bounty manager is a strange thing in my opinion, what a bounty manager has to do is quite a few things :
- filter out the clients they handle because so many bounty manager nowadays, they only care about money
- For kyc problem, it must be explained at the beginning of bounty, because some of them are weird, they applied kyc at the end of the campaign
- the rest they must also care about the participants' problems, for example, if there are participants who have problems with their payment address, they act immediately, and also they may have to check the participants who commit fraud (multiple accounts) because this will have little effect on other participants.

dont join the bounty then no one force bounty hunters to join the bounty dat need kyc if bounty hunters dont want do kyc then its not bounty managers fault if in the end the participatn not get paid

KYC for bounty hunter needed in order to prevent users from using multiple account to do the bounty. Of course if you feel that it's not worth it or insecure giving your data to unknown party, then do not join or apply for be a bounty manager instead

Simply put, if you don't like projects that require participants to do KYC, you can avoid them or participate with ordinary projects that don't have to be KYC. if I think a project that requires participants to do the KYC indicates that the project is responsible.

I participated in many yahoo62278 companies and he never required a KYC for checking cheaters. I don’t like sending my personal data to unknown teams. Therefore, I am against KYC for bountists. Not so much money are  paying in bounty campaigns to inculpate hunters of  laundering  money.

I feel the same way. It is absurd that projects always require us to provide KYC to them, even though the government has never asked for it to check transactions.
distribution will be easy if they send the government agency their marketing policy and participant's spreadsheet, after which they can easily transfer tokens. I know this because I have an uncle who works at the government agency and the procedures are very simple and do not require too much information.
So what do they get our information for? I think they use our information to sell it to those who need to make a lot of money from it.

Take bounty managers as hunters as well what they ddo is get paid for their services. Most of them pass KYC with core team members before managing their campaign. It isn't really their fault that kyc is being required of hunters team members decides on kyc.

I fully agree that the KYC procedure should be done by both bounty managers and members of the project team. Otherwise, ICO will never get out of the pit in which they now find themselves.

Yes, it is KYC to avoid scamers, but what I am surprised about is when we do KYC, but worthless tokens, there are many Bounties that I experienced, but bounties that don't need KYC are actually expensive token in the market, such as the Sessia project.

Please remember that doing KYC for weak projects can lead in the future that your data will be sell online for those who pay bigger so are you willing to take this risk ? I can give the latest example that I had on this , I did KYC for migranet bounty/project and in the end I got nothing from that bounties but now they have my data and I'm not comfortable with that to be honest.

So if a manager needs to make a KYC, the projects must be more than solid in order for him to do that. Personally I don't want to see KYC again for weak projects as most of them don't even achieve the soft cap and they just leave with your data and if you try to speak with them about your data they will simply ignore you or they will tell they delete it but they provide some evidence ? Never.
I'm comfortable with KYC only for strong projects who have separate funds for hunters and managers.

So they are going to do KYC but where they are going to submit their KYC? to the developers or bounty hunters, when all the negotiations are between the developers of the projects and the independent bounty managers, it's between them, they are the one that will set the rules and we just follow them.

What kind of responsibility are you talking about?10% or less projects with KYC that pay a fee. It does not solve anything at all, but only carries the risk of leakage of user data.

The existence of KYC in my opinion is controversial because it involves personal data from someone and indeed can detect fraud so that our personal data can also be misused by others for their interests. itself we don't know either

Even if a bounty manager has a policy in a Bounty campaign, I know that he does not insist on participating. In other words, we may not be able to participate if that is the rule, it's just that simple and searching we think is legitimate but there are no KYC rules for bounty hunters.

I actually agree, but for KYC I reject it because it involves the personal data of each person who is a part of privacy should not be coercive. there are other methods if BM wants to detect fraud or to verify what can be done

I dont think this is necessary for Managers or its the jurisdiction of the project whether to impose KYC on them, of course they will screen also them and know hem via videocall or something to confirm first they are good and legit managers. If hunters wouldn't like this then feel free not to join. There are lots of hunters needed this and we arent obliged by the project to do so. Its their term so if you dont like it then good luck. Remember, we are just participating, sound unfair but that's life.

I am agreed with your compliment about KYC. I think KYC makes for country restriction who guys participating as a investors but in the last year KYC required also bounty hunters. Also i feel depressed when i submitted my documents than if project team use in wrong place or sell in the other platform. Actually KYC threatened for identity i think. In that case, i ignoring most of the projects which aren’t very promising.   

Where did you see that bounty managers are managing the KYC process?
In most cases you have to send your KYC document to the ICO, exchange or the third party service that is qualified to do it.

I completely disagree with you, I support providing KYC procedures for bounty hunters. I would even say I consider it as a necessity. Bounty hunters cheating the campaign, they use multi account or even spam bounty campaign. Usually it doesn't take much time to verification, so it's ok.

Why do we have to do kyc to get an award? Really. I can't understand.All we do is comment on the project.why do we have to give them all our identity and contact addresses ? Maybe they're sharing that information with others, and we'll never know. I advise you to stay away from projects that require Kyc.We don't even know who bitcoin creator satoshi Nakamato is.

They are allowed to do what they want, unfortunately, and I believe if a bounty manager is working with a serious project, they know each other not only from telegram, but personally. Anyway, KYC for hunters is made only for one purpose, to pay less tokens.

Most of the bounty managers and project owners use this technique not to pay bounties mate. It is really a common thing to do. They actually know its is an odd situtation but they do it just to eliminate people and pay less. So their assets will not dump so hard. In the past 1.5 years, almost all of the projects use this KYC thing, it actually provides a healthier crypto space by getting real people, however, when it is used to eliminate hunters, it becomes not for the good of people.

I think that the rules are set by the development team itself. Bounty Manager cannot influence KYC requirements.

It wouldn't make any sense for a bounty manager to do a KYC. This is Crypto.

Absolutely I agree. It's not the Bounty Manager, it's the team. After all, the bounty manager is just doing his job. And I've never heard a bounty manager collect all the funds and run away. If the team is trustworthy and has AML registration, I think there is no need for KYC for the bounty manager.

i think, kyc is special for people that have account. so manager and developer can control them. its not fair if some people join many account in one campaign. but its not in vain if manager fill kyc, so we are equally between manager and bounty hunter.
all of it, back to them they want to fill kyc or find other thing to keep their anonymous on crypto

I think this is good for the users of bitcointalk because they will not worry about the identity of the campaign manager if problems comes in the way. But, we must remember that KYC is required by the owner of that specific campaign. Sometimes it is for the users to avoid money laundering but in many case owners of the specific campaign uses KYC to run away some of the money for those who didn't provide KYC identity. They should announce it more earlier right. So for me KYC should also be on the owner and the campaign manager of the campaign.

If the bounty hunter required to have kyc then it is also a must than the bounty manager will do that.
Well i think those investors needds to do KYC on that also.
But is it important? how do we know if the BM done the KYC?

All should have KYC including the team behind who's asking for such requirements, complying with this gives more confidence that the project will not be ruined. If the team requires such information it's fair enough to also process their own first. It can be handled by third party service where all those who process KYC will see who's done doing it so it will be fair to everyone to participate.

KYC is still a trend. Maybe a lot of people are afraid to fill the KYC form. Because we also do not get a definite security guarantee. Yes, it may be a good choice so that the Bounty manager also performs KYC. But I guess this will be tough because all the Bounty manager rules are controlling it.

But now, of course, we are given the information at the beginning of the campaign, that this project will use KYC or not. So we can decide to join or not. All decisions are in your hands.

KYC isn't mandatory by bounty manager, all requirements of KYC is run by devs. If KYC is mandatory for bounty manager, they can do it. In 2018 some bounty manager is now hunting campaign. I have no problem with KYC, I trust where I participate in.

If we have objection on KYC bounty campaign, then we can feel free to not join the campaign.
Even the manager has been KYC verified, we cannot sure the project will really pay the hunters or not after the campaign end.

But if your submitted KYC projects anyhow scam or softcap not reached how would feel than? KYC for bounty hunters it’s not fair. It’s only perfect for investors because many countries are restricted in cryptocurrency investment. KYC is something positive point because bounty hunters can't cheat using multiple accounts. I always worried about my identity documents which i submitted in many projects.               

KYC for prize hunters is very good, because it can minimize cheating like multi-accounts. but depending on how the project you want to participate in, if the project is valid, the team and the developer are transparent does not matter if the participant has to do the KYC, it shows the project is responsible.
simple, if you don't like KYC, you can move on to projects that don't require KYC.

KYC for Investors and Developers.
very important, that way we will find out that they really are a real team, and a good project will not employ a bad employee reputation.

KYC for Bounty Manager.
I don't think this is very important, the problem is that Bounty Manager has different parts from investors and developers. but it doesn't matter if the Bounty manager is required to do KYC much better in my opinion.

If the bounty manager is not trusted I think the Idea to also for them to have KYC is good but if the campaign manager are trusted and have good reputation it is not really need for them. The Idea of this because of a lot of bounty scam and maybe for the bounty manager who are new and are no reputable to pass their KYC so the bounty participants will be sure that campaign is legit and payable.

KYC is a mehod to eliminate scammers and multiple accounds to I support these verification system. Bounties' have %50 multi accounds and other %40 is doing shitty work and trying to claim tokens. %10 is creating great content and contributing very well but because of the stake system, these people do not get what they deserve. So I think KYC should exist, however, bounty managers should tell about this before the bounty starts.