Looks like icocountdown is going around trying to discredit ethercamp and are using this occasion to promote their shitty website even further.
If you noticed you got two team members on here trying to defend their cause, yes they come in couple defending each other.
I delisted ether.camp hacker gold for the following reasons:
* No business model.
* No understanding of finance or strategy relating to the development of ether.camp and startups involved.
* Fundamentally flawed voting that decimates young startups.
* Lack of independant security audits.
* No cap on the actual fundrasing endeavour.
* No clear incentives for people participating in the crowdfund.
No business model They haven't raised capital yet how are they supposed to come forward with a decent business model? If you look at the sale page they have shared different potential outcomes depending on how much they raise. Check it out. After the token sale they will probably have a better idea and what the priorities are.
No understanding of finance or strategy relating to the development of ether.camp and startups involved So first ethercamp doesn't invest directly in the startups and they have mentioned this several times during the video AMA. This is a stage for startups to meet judges and mentors with experience and contacts. Also what do you even mean by "development of ethercamp"? As per the startups and why the hackathon is a great place for them is the respectable judges they have announced, one that really standout is Adam Draper from Boost VC. The others are also from VC companies and from very respectable firms like Deloitte, Santander, Bloomberg, Skype, RWE and several very well known companies such a ShapeShift, ConsenSys, RSK, etc. So do you still have any doubts on what are the incentives for projects to be overseen and advised by such great mentors? Do you think that there might be the possibility some of the judges may want to invest or support the best ideas?
Fundamentally flawed voting that decimates young startupsThe team has spoken about this during the AMA and said they are working on the hackathon specific contracts and voting (they haven't been released yet). There is a month before the start of the competition and there is plenty of time to finish things up and present to the community for review. I'm giving them some time and the benefit of the doubt and seen their previous experience in building and running ethereum based tools they will come up with something that works.
Lack of independant security auditsThere have been 2 security audits for the code that is actually being used for the sale. They are featured on the sale page but I share them here anyway.
1
https://medium.com/zeppelin-blog/ethercamps-hacker-gold-hkg-public-code-audit-b7dd3a2fe43b2
https://tokenmarket.net/hackergold-hkg-reviewSo that is an outright lie. Why would they lie?
No cap on the actual fundrasing endeavourThere is a cap and is set to 4 million eth. Again another lie, seems to be a trend.
No clear incentives for people participating in the crowdfundThe team has been clear, or at least I have understood it from what I've seen on the AMA, that funds go entirely to ethercamp. As a contributor to the sale I see the platform becoming a prominent "Virtual Accelerator" stage where people with ideas can meet experts who can advise, support and even invest. Furthermore the public can also show their support which in turn can give startups a feel on how they are perceived. All this without having to travel. It is an amazing new way to go about getting your ideas going. HKG can only be bought once during this crowdfund. Imagine if the hackathon is successful, would the next one attract more ideas, fans and judges? Would there be demand for HKG that can only be purchased on the market? I have a strong feeling it will. But hey make your own judgement, don't take my word for it.
To be honest missing the points I just made above is a failure from icocountdown, shows they have no vision or understanding on what this is about.
And why would they lie? This is what bugs me the most.
I have also heard that people has had issues with them in the past. Basically their service is not free they charge quite a bit to add an ICO to their page. And ethercamp was on their website for a while. So ethercamp paid them for the service which makes them customers. Then all of a sudden they go nuts about them with the post I quoted above shared on several forums. I mean is that how you treat your customers? I never seen a company that acts that way and I am totally sorry for ethercamp who have done nothing wrong to deserve this treatment.
Did some research and it's not the first time they do this. See the links below with users who had the same experience.
1.
https://steemit.com/scam/@moh-rokib/the-truth-about-icocountdown-com-by-michael-douranos2.
https://www.reddit.com/r/icocrypto/comments/4zy9ec/hello_from_alex_icocountdowncom_d/I understand crypto is the far west right now and everyone is trying to make money however I don't think going after your own customer by lying about them does any good nor makes ICOCountdown look like heroes trying to help the community. There is a financial motive behind this. If they were doing it for free maybe it wouldn't look so bad but they actually make money with their website, in my opinion this is very unprofessional from their part. I would recommend anyone with an upcoming ICO to steer clear from them, they are vindicative characters who only care about capitalizing on the ICO fever. Beware.
By the way tokenmarket is a much better website than ICOCountdown with serious and professional people behind it. There are also a series of very useful tips regarding ICOs.
https://tokenmarket.net/ico-calendarand
ico-list another site with a lot more useful and detailed info as well as many more ICOs featured.
https://www.ico-list.com/ Compare the two with ICOCountdown and make your own judgement. Good to see some competition coming up in the ico listings space.
Audits should be done by security professionals. These are not professional security audits. That is not my standard for an external audit. Or any sort of proper security audit.
Remember the DAO was audited too?
I know staff of tokenmarket he is also a good friend and he has also expressed concerns about ether.camp - ask Gavin yourself
When I mention the cap - I mean there is no cap on funds raised because of the business model - there is no relatable level of finance - what are the costs, what capital do you actually need to move forward etc.
I won't bother to address the rest because it is pure nonsense. It is crazy to me that you think a business should raise funds first before getting a business model?
There is no rationale in that.
