Do we need an ICO regulation?

[c0ldburn]

Edit: Oh yea cofoundit, I totally forgot , but as far as I remember their business would mostly be to guide a company on how to make its ICO successful, not to guarantee us - the public if the said company is legitimate or a scam.

There is no guarantee for success in any investment.

What CFI will do is scrutinise an ICO as they will not want their brand/coins associated with a scam. 

[Kray]

I think if ICO have regulation it will make cryptocurrency looks like fiat money, so regulator can control ICO token rule or anything. All we need just, trusted escrow services. Anyone wanna join ICO should do their research in whitepaper, team and token it self

[dihari]

it doesn't matter whether you need it or not, it's gonna come some day pretty soon. people elsewhere are starting to take notice.

Yeah​ I see this vision too. We can't​ let anyone raising funds without any responsibility anymore. The verified ICO is the way to bring safety for the Investors in crypto world community.

[oaks05]

eventually regulation yes, especially if some of these project turn out to be big scams that will be a ton of money lost.

[arpon11]

Regulations of ICO is the best thing to do now as 100 of them are pricking up every day. We should support government regulations on this as this is for the survival of crypto currencies.  ICO are not regulated and that is why there are alot of manipulation in coins pricing.

[klarki]

Regulation of this market is necessary!
Soon there will be such a project.

[adhitthana]

We need a rules or something to prevent us from being scammed

Will rules prevent you being scammed?
Regulators can be corrupt too.

The best way to avoid being scammed is to do your own homework

[shyliar]

There are regulations that will send an investor to prison when they harm those who scam them in an ICO. So it seems currently things are definitely designed in favour of the scammers. As long as you're okay with that feel free to invest.

[DimaZ88]

It looks like China already believes there needs to be regulation. Ultimately I think this is a good thing for blockchain startups and ICOs. Investors like myself are always wary of all the hyped up ICOs, and many claim to follow protocols for accrediting investors but don't.

There are already systems in place, the smartest regulations will be geared towards validating ICOs that actually use these systems and protocols. Now that regulation has begun, I think that this will start being the trend.

[vtos marketing]

tha main problem i see is to give some test of the service not only showing the white paper and the marketing. so our ico will be launch with a working version of the service.

and as I read in other post is important that the ico address real problems, like our ico we are focusing on helping YouTubers content creator to get pay more and faster using vtos crypto tokens generated by etherum.

and viewers get tokens for watching videos using p2p to help with the bandwith with out using external plugins or software like ipfs, its going to be native support for mobile and pc.

in the coming months will be doing the marketing here in this forum.

hopefully, we can get your support in this coming months.

teaser

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8F1E__jnfc


Regards.

edgardo aguirre

[rainbow169]

We need regulation so that general public can participate with confidence rather just limit to qualified investors. It is crucial for the long term success for ICO and crypto market

Although we have seen many successful self regulated ICOs and we can also do research about the team and advisor background beforahand. We still need regulation to make sure everyone will follow the rule end to end. Look at the recent incident with Enigma, could be a great project but perhaps let down by the increase of the hard cap. I am sure the intention may well be good, but this would not happen if regulated.

[vtos marketing]

the idea is to not be regulated, we need to research before enter a ico investment it will be sufficient enough, this is a new business it will regulate itself people are smart.

teaser

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8F1E__jnfc


Regards.

edgardo aguirre

[Oroplata]

I agree we need a trusted and independent ICO regulator and represented by respected individuals in digital currency.

[subG]

Many people like myself got into cryptocurrency due to the lack of regulations a few years back.  Now with all these restrictions coming up, I think the less regulations, the better for cryptocurrency.  Regulations will not prevent scams, it just makes path for new types of scams.  

[StockBet.com]

Regulation is a double edged sword.

Currently, securities offerings are heavily regulated.  Most start-ups would not have the resources to comply with regulations and therefore, they can only take money from friends, family and accredited investors.  This means that if ICOs are regulated, most people would not be allowed to invest.

However, most accredited investors (wealthy people) don't know anything about technology, crypto currencies and the risks involved.  A basement dweller geek understands these things better.  Regulation will put up a wall between ICOs and the basement dweller.

Yes, regulation will save some basement dwellers from getting screwed by some ICO scams.  It will also prevent the basement dweller from investing in the next Ethereum and the basement dweller is much better equipped to spot the next Ethereum than most accredited investors.

Regulators give preference to accredited investors, but their logic has major flaws:

1) Regulators think that accredited investors are better investors.  Not necessarily.  A doctor knows nothing about investing.  A surviving spouse may know nothing about business.  Celebrities are HORRIBLE investors.

2) Regulators think that accredited investors can afford to lose the investment.  A 65 year old, retired accredited investor cannot afford to lose 100% of his net worth.  If he does, the rest of his life is screwed.  An 20 year old basement dweller can lose 100% of his net worth and it won't be a serious problem.

[geac.xraekhurcoe]

There is two sides of the coins here:

1. You can't really regulate something decentralized and world wide like crypto tokens; They can't regulate pseudo-anonymous transactions or privacy enabled transactions;
2. If the company is regularly registered in some chamber of commerce in a country, that country Government is able to regulate that company accounting books but still the company may not register it's activity on the crypto world;

But if Gov claim to regulate those registered companies another profile of investors would come to the crypto world making it stronger.
There is already a lot of third-parties firms doings ICO analysis and rating them. Govs doing their own analysis and approval of companies will not mean an investor will read their analysis and invest in scams anyways, there is no law that make investors obligated to read companies analysis and no analysis in the world that predict the future of that company being a good investment. 

[StockBet.com]

There is two sides of the coins here:

1. You can't really regulate something decentralized and world wide like crypto tokens; They can't regulate pseudo-anonymous transactions or privacy enabled transactions;
2. If the company is regularly registered in some chamber of commerce in a country, that country Government is able to regulate that company accounting books but still the company may not register it's activity on the crypto world;

But if Gov claim to regulate those registered companies another profile of investors would come to the crypto world making it stronger.
There is already a lot of third-parties firms doings ICO analysis and rating them. Govs doing their own analysis and approval of companies will not mean an investor will read their analysis and invest in scams anyways, there is no law that make investors obligated to read companies analysis and no analysis in the world that predict the future of that company being a good investment. 

You bring up something I was going to write earlier.

Even if governments regulate, it doesn't mean that they will be able to enforce.  China has banned its people from selling coins in ICOs.  This might be enforceable.  But if China bans its people from buying coins, this will be hard to enforce.

FYI, governments do not and have never analyzed companies for investors.  Governments will ban companies from making promises or claims, such as:  "buy our coin and it will go up in value by 200%".

[Indrawan77]

I dont think we need that, the government only going to make crypto currencies cant grow properly, crypto currencies is a centralized world and most of the people love it, and ICO is the result of somebody creativity, so I dont like it got disturb by the government

[cryptowomba]

I do believe that regulations would help raise up the level of ICO's.

The issue is that it depends on the regulation and whether they will write the regulations to strangle ICO's or push them to up their game.

I do believe that it is too easy to make an ICO and there are people who are going to abuse this opportunity.

[Big Data Coin]

In the US, there will be the typical inter-agency battle between the CFTC, SEC, etc. (Comptroller of the Currency?) and inter-committee battle in Congress between e.g., the Senate Banking Committee, Senate Committee on Agriculture, etc.

It is game over pretty much as soon as victims such as single parents supporting 4 kids and caregiving for a spouse and parent with dementia, cancer, etc. lose their life savings and the mainstream media starts reporting on these shenanigans.

Remember, every 2 years a House Representative is up for re-election, as are ~1/3 of the US Senators.

There are some good ICOs. Do your own research but Tezos may be okay since VC Tim Draper is backing it.