Guys, are you checking Twitter and Facebook posts manually or using some kind of software?

I read about "buying stars" several years ago and at that time I found out that all that is not only cheap but also unofficial and one could not expect any tangible rights. Has the situation changed?

Excuse me, I probably misunderstood: Positive means strictly higher than zero, or simply not negative including zero?

The final goal of any regulation is protection. Ok, maybe in the perfect world. But anyway, I believe "ICO regulation" is not a single, pre-defined substance so that we could say whether it is good or not. One regulation might be good, another one might be bad. What seems to be more interesting to me is what a good regulation is or would be (along with what a bad one is as well).

What ICO details do you guys look into when deciding on whether one is bad, or good, or the best? Team, product, market volume, anything else? Would be really interesting to learn about your criteria.

Altcoins backed by solid products seem to have the best potential. Most of such (good) projects are long-term, but it is really hard to imagine that anything can go so wrong that their cryptocurrencies would fail. If a project and its product are worthy then their coin is and is going go be worthy.

It is simply the fact that the majority of people only wants big profits asap, but the real life will change that mood making the people's behavior on the market more mature, I believe.

So what do you think is the growth potential that BTC and ETH have in the medium term? Where will they be in, like, late 2018?

I first heard about bitcoin many years ago. That was on a blog of a person who had just started mining it and tried to find some special video graphics card. I do not even remember who was that but he is definitely very rich now if only he managed to find what he wanted and actually mined at least something at that time many years ago.