I feel that earnings on bounty could be based on luck and not only due diligence on the part of the bounty hunters. Some projects could use high ranking members who know their onus, and these members may carry out their private research to verify the legitimacy of the project, but along the line the project would disappear or refuse to pay hunters.

The era of deflationary tokens are past. I remember when deflationary tokens was the big thing and people were basically holding them simply because of the fact that the tokens had a rapid increase in value. There was basically no use case for all the deflationary tokens I read about. I knew it was just a bubble and won't stand the test of time. I still hold some deflationary tokens, but they are as good as worthless.

One of the lessons I've learnt in the cryptocurrency space is that nothing is impossible. Some persons met ethereum when it was traded for less than $20, but didn't secure it, expecting the value to drop, only to meet it at a much higher rate. It may be impossible for Bitcoin or ethereum to drop to less than $20 now. There's a Chinese adage, that says " the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time is Now". We need to take the bull by the horn and quit procrastinating. Get involved in holding some good tokens like ethereum, BNB, etc and hope for the best.

I have a large number of tokens, derived from airdrops, but I don't think any is as old as year 2014. This is simply because, I wasn't aware of the existence of cryptocurrency in 2014. The space was less cumbersome as at 2014 and ICO's were not as rampant as it became in year 2016.

I'm yet to understand why people still invest in ICO. From the little information I have, I don't see ICO's to be lucrative. Most of the project don't get their softcap and several others tend to abandon the project after getting what they want. In several occasions, projects tend to list their tokens far below the ICO price, making it unprofitable for investors to sell. I would rather wait for the project to list and buy at the low price, than invest in the ICO.

I've heard contradicting allegations about tether. Some persons are saying that the project doesn't have sufficient back up in USD for the tether in circulation. I've also read that the audit carried out vindicated tether which proofs that the company is solvent and have the required back up.

Please, I would appreciate if you can make such sections known to us. Since most bounty hunters don't know how to go about the due diligence, getting to read what high rank members have researched would be helpful. We can start from there before learning to carry out the due diligence ourselves.

I believe the issue of compromise was from the users wallet and not from metamask. I personally don't use metamask anymore after my wallet was compromised and it sent 0.45 ethereum twice to an unknown wallet and I lost about 1 ethereum to the hacker. It feels really bad because that was the first time I got 1 ethereum that I can call mine. I later found out that I installed a compromised extension from the app store and it gave the hacker access to my funds.

It would be a good idea if projects can pay hunters in stable coins or tradable tokens such as Ethereum or ripples. But the issue is that only few projects can afford to risk paying from their purse. Most of the projects that employ the service of bounty hunters are new projects which are yet to be listed and are in need of funds to execute the project.