 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »
|
After I learned that the project will integrate the KYC process, I immediately decided not to participate in the project, the fact is that I recently came across a group in Telegram, where I saw a lot of photos from the KYC process, that is, it turns out that the whole procedure as a result of simply collecting data, then to sell them. Think with your head.
How can you so definitely come under the impression of them using it to sell data? |
|
|
|
This is a tough one. Personally, I feel that the whitepaper is the most crucial aspect of any ICO even more than other factors like team etc. Why? The whitepaper outlines how serious the team is about their project. I usually check the whitepaper and examine it thoroughly(Objectives of ICO, Features of the coin, Roadmap etc) before deciding whether or not to invest into a particular ICO. I check the team members, website etc also, but give maximum importance to the whitepaper which is why I recommend everyone check the whitepaper before investing into any ICO.
But the whitepapers can be written by third-party services these days. |
|
|
|
I think an experience and solid project team is the most important factor for a successful ICO and project product in long term.
Definitely. They can drive the project towards success even when given an average idea. |
|
|
|
There are a lot of ICOs going around right now and most are considered scams. People around the globe have put out some legit points to check if any ICO is legit or not.
Now the thing is, scammers have equal access to content and have made the necessary arrangements to overlook such mistakes, and also I believe that more than ICOs being scammy, it is just them failing to reach their roadmap. That is like most of the startups failing halfway through.
I think the most important aspect to check is for a dedicated team more than anything else. Obviously, it is hard to judge but more than anything else, it is what drives an ICO to its success.
I am open to opinions and would love to know if anything else is as important.
The devs are without a doubt the most important part of a project but at the same time everything is important, if the developers are good but their idea sucks or it has been made a million times then the ico is going to fail, if the developers are good but they are not able to follow the road map then people will lose faith in the project ever being developed, so as you can see while the developers are critical to the success there are simply too many variables to consider if an ico is going to become successful. Makes sense. Sometimes even when the product is good and the marketing bad, the ICO fails sadly. |
|
|
|
Top 3 I am looking for an ICO are
1. Team
2. Use Case
3. Prototype or Github
Github does not make that much sense to me but the idea and team are something I can check. |
|
|
|
Try to get as much information about the team behind the project it self, you cant trus some random person who doesnt even have linkedin page right ? after that try to look at what project they devlop, is that project even make sense to realise
The right team is the key to a successful ICO I guess. Yes. In-depth research into the team is definitely required. |
|
|
|
There are various factors that support the success of the ICO. In my opinion, they could be willing to spend money with a large amount just to promote their ICO via social media or other. Not only that, they also know how to get investors interested in their ICO. For example creating simple, high-quality video content that can explain the purpose of their project in it in order to attract investors to join their ICO. So from that, not just a promotion but they know how to make the promotion can attract investors. Thank you.
Right now more than the idea, the marketing seems to pay off. Higher the promotions and budget put into marketing, greater the yield from investors. Thanks for the time. |
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of ICOs going around right now and most are considered scams. People around the globe have put out some legit points to check if any ICO is legit or not.
Now the thing is, scammers have equal access to content and have made the necessary arrangements to overlook such mistakes, and also I believe that more than ICOs being scammy, it is just them failing to reach their roadmap. That is like most of the startups failing halfway through.
I think the most important aspect to check is for a dedicated team more than anything else. Obviously, it is hard to judge but more than anything else, it is what drives an ICO to its success.
I am open to opinions and would love to know if anything else is as important.
|
|
|
|
Good concept. Will definitely invest. Do you have a bounty program I could take part in?
Right now, we don't have a working bounty program but it's coming soon. Stay tuned. You guys really need to promote your project more. Also, are you planning to release any source code on GitHub? Many people look for some development before they actually consider ICOs legit. |
|
|
|
First of all, I carefully looked at the site, this site is very general, and then I try to join their group Telegram, only to find that only 32 members, then the gtihub checked the, without any code about this project, the basic can be concluded that this is a scam.
I wouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions here. It doesn't have to be a scam but it could be a very poorly managed project. Look at projects like COTI, Morpheus or XiWatt. They present their strengths in a completely different manner. Yea, I agree. It's probably just a poorly managed project. They should increase their promotional efforts just to come in under the radar. Also, they don't have a working model yet, that's why no source code on Github. Probably looking for a little moolah and then kickstarting their project development. Doesn't seem like a scam but yea, poorly managed just all. |
|
|
|
|
Good concept. Will definitely invest. Do you have a bounty program I could take part in?
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptoloans is doing exactly what kripton is doing. I don't think these guys are doing anything revolutionary. Most ICOs are just copying others. Enkidu seems to be doing something different. First of its kind. Eggs datacentre is also doing what kelta is trying to do. You need to find ICOs that are first on the market. But thanks for the list.
|
|
|
|
|
You should have a list for checking ICOs legitimacy. Go through their whitepaper, their team, their advisors, and the rest of the stuff. I went online and did a search on Enkidu, and found that they don't have a lot of promotions done on them. Their team seems legit. They also have top guys as their advisors. All looks good but you can't find them everywhere. Still, I like their concept. Looks promising. Just a quick question, how did you come across their site?
|
|
|
|
|
Most of it was said by the first person who commented, GBCrypto1. One more thing you could add to your list is if they are openly promoting themselves. More promotion means more people looking at you. Enkidu is currently not so famous. I did a search on these guys. They were very few places they were listed on. So, you can't be sure if they are good. You can try putting small amounts of money in. And later you can increase your investments if it goes well. I usually do this for most ICOs.
|
|
|
|
|
Although Bitcoin does have value currently, it has a lot of limitations. Its block size is limited, and transaction fees are high. Many alt coins are used for technologies that are trying to overcome these limitations. So, yea, in my opinion, altcoins do have a future. Also, blockchain technology is being used in many industries. Altcoins help fuel these technologies. Bitcoin is probably just the tip of the iceberg regarding blockchain technology.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin will probably not replace fiat currency completely because it requires a unified model and to achieve that everyone must be on the same page. The Internet is still not available in a lot of areas of the world. It also depends on the government as to what they choose to do. If they are comfortable with using blockchain tech then bitcoin will be the first one to boom. The government, currently, has the highest authority. And a lot of people take the government seriously. So, they are responsible for the last couple of people who are yet to join the band.
|
|
|
|
|
All the people currently invested in bitcoin want it to be a globally accepted currency. Many actually believe that this can change the world. One single currency can make things faster, better, and more trustworthy. If you study how blockchain works, you'll notice how it has the potential to make things better. Sure, bitcoin has its limitations but I'm sure with the protocols being updated constantly it'll become a greater asset than regular fiat money. So, yes, Bitcoin will become the new face of currency. Or some amazing altcoin could beat bitcoin to it
|
|
|
|
Basically, it's in a pool. It can always be taken out of the pool at any time. It only stays in the pool to make things faster within the channel. Is that right? |
|
|
|
|
I read an article explaining the entire process of the lightning network. Only two transactions will be verified. The first one to open a channel and the second one to close the channel. But what about the transactions within the channel? Nobody is verifying those transactions. One member out of two could falsify a transaction within the channel. Am i missing something here?
|
|
|
|
Segwit does not have a sidechain I.e lightning Network for channelling payment.
Meanwhile Segwit2x is delivered with a sidechain such as (LN).
Lightning Network always took place off-chain and can only be incorporated into the chain, the transactions between two people is not stored in a blockchain and not broadcasted to a third party the balances between the two parties involved In the transaction is modified and signed by both of them.
I read an article about Lightning Network. LN sort of opens a channel between two people for them to transact. And this channel is then broadcasted to the blockchain when the time expires. What I didn't understand is that how are transactions being monitored within the channel. Also, if they are being verified after the last transaction on the channel or when the time expires, the person has to go their entire history of transactions to find a false lead and report it to the blockchain. It's time consuming and not very accommodating. Am I missing something here? |
|
|
|
|
