red flags - how to spot

[charlie137]

how to spot the obvious

a) no/weird github )
b) stretched roadmap (you can bootstrap everything in a few hours, there is plenty of generators to start the coin with everything built)
c) ICO
d) white paper
e) copyright violation
f) high price
g) guides

a)
learn to read github https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin. the only thing that all successful projects have in common - solid github. some scammers already started to working on that, so even good looking github can make zero sense after some studying and reading/testing. if you would look at the differences in versions/branches of bitcoin https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/branches - you would notice that it is very easy to spot the project that is based on an old core. reason for that could be an absence of proper documentation/guide how to bootstart current version of the original project and lack of skills.

learning ubuntu to feel comfortable building the core will take couple weekends - but will pay itself in lightspeed. i think this is a must, since we are talking about financial platform. you probably will have to lear it at some point anyway if you want to succeed in cryptocurrency market. documentations usually very rich, but on advanced level. don't forget that you working with experimental software. basic linux skills could give you advantage like being able to solo mine new coins while developers still building binaries)) this could lead to a very high profit if played right.

b)
since most of the projects are forks of forks, the software is already finished and all you need is copy paste. so to start the clone - depends on how fast you can type. i haven't seen the roadmap that can not be finished by one pair of hands in 48-60 hours. hardest part - pay 3 btc to get listed on exhcange. might be a week. why would you stretch release of the wallet that is ready on the next year, 6 months after an exchange listing.

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

d) white paper is something that you would want to put in frame. its an idea of your project. academical representation, if you want. but looking at all the current flow of projects - most of them dedicated over 65% of the content to expanded budget program and referral system.

e) this might be tricky. but its a very common flag. im seeing people stating like "oh, yeah maybe looks similar. but its fine.". its not. companies getting sued regardless geographical location (!). and its not okay even if its just a little similar. one of my favorites from 2017 year https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/22/15678296/paypal-pandora-lawsuit-logo-design

f) i guess this is already explained in part c)

g) the reason i got into cryptocurrency was the open source. like to read. but since the tech is still in experimental state - it requires some skills to feel comfortable around the environment. so if you don't know how something works - you study first. but what can be observed right now - armies of masternodes with blind operators who's running everything from root and then questioning disappearance of their funds. but devs don't want you to learn. or you would figure out what they are actually doing.

this is based on data and observations from jan 2016 to dec 2017.

UPD after the dark winter, amount of scam coins sky rocketed, more and more masternodes auctions and ICOs trying to lead investors in the wrong world where blockchain could be valued over $1000 for one masternode, one week after the start)) since value of the project develops from its security and functionality abilities - there is no possible way for a new coin to prove its characteristics (you looking at months, years of robust testing and hacking).

[xda-developer]

Very interesting post. Thanks!
My view that it is not simple to find out project without this red flags. Just try to hide ICOs + Projects without github and you will see that it is really few projects only.

[charlie137]

Very interesting post. Thanks!
My view that it is not simple to find out project without this red flags. Just try to hide ICOs + Projects without github and you will see that it is really few projects only.

thank you! thats exactly my point. everybody's saying that there soo many coins and etc. but i think the number of actual ongoing projects is very small. its still a very nice selection though)

[vv181]

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Investing in ICO is really a high-risk investment. I suggest you to stay away from ICO investment unless you have a pretty good knowledge about cryptocurrency in general. And I agree with Charlie, just let the market set the price, if the project has a use, the price will grow over time. Investing in coins without the price track record is dangerous.

[xda-developer]

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Investing in ICO is really a high-risk investment. I suggest you to stay away from ICO investment unless you have a pretty good knowledge about cryptocurrency in general. And I agree with Charlie, just let the market set the price, if the project has a use, the price will grow over time. Investing in coins without the price track record is dangerous.

ICO it is the wrong way to start cryptocurrency. It could be applicable for projects - like coinbase for example. But cryptocurrency should not be distributed in frame of ICO.

[charlie137]

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Investing in ICO is really a high-risk investment. I suggest you to stay away from ICO investment unless you have a pretty good knowledge about cryptocurrency in general. And I agree with Charlie, just let the market set the price, if the project has a use, the price will grow over time. Investing in coins without the price track record is dangerous.

ICO it is the wrong way to start cryptocurrency. It could be applicable for projects - like coinbase for example. But cryptocurrency should not be distributed in frame of ICO.

true. still - some new exchanges offering their own coins at the opening, so its technically same ico. fixed shares could be a good solution, but don't remember usage of that approach

[vv181]

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Investing in ICO is really a high-risk investment. I suggest you to stay away from ICO investment unless you have a pretty good knowledge about cryptocurrency in general. And I agree with Charlie, just let the market set the price, if the project has a use, the price will grow over time. Investing in coins without the price track record is dangerous.

ICO it is the wrong way to start cryptocurrency. It could be applicable for projects - like coinbase for example. But cryptocurrency should not be distributed in frame of ICO.

As I said, an ICO investment requires a pretty good cryptocurrency knowledge and a lot of experience. But I believe even if the person has a lot of experience about cryptocurrency, they will stay away from an ICO or invest a little amount. I don't say ICO is bad, it has advantages and also a disadvantage, but currently, even though there are a lot of scam project that uses ICO investment type, there is a hidden gem, that worth to invest.

[AdamSv]

how to spot the obvious

a) no/weird github )
b) stretched roadmap (you can bootstrap everything in a few hours, there is plenty of generators to start the coin with everything built)
c) ICO
d) white paper
e) copyright violation
f) high price
g) guides

a)
learn to read github https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin. the only thing that all successful projects have in common - solid github. some scammers already started to working on that, so even good looking github can make zero sense after some studying and reading/testing. if you would look at the differences in versions/branches of bitcoin https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/branches - you would notice that it is very easy to spot the project that is based on an old core. reason for that could be an absence of proper documentation/guide how to bootstart current version of the original project and lack of skills.

learning ubuntu to feel comfortable building the core will take couple weekends - but will pay itself in lightspeed. i think this is a must, since we are talking about financial platform. you probably will have to lear it at some point anyway if you want to succeed in cryptocurrency market. documentations usually very rich, but on advanced level. don't forget that you working with experimental software. basic linux skills could give you advantage like being able to solo mine new coins while developers still building binaries)) this could lead to a very high profit if played right.

b)
since most of the projects are forks of forks, the software is already finished and all you need is copy paste. so to start the clone - depends on how fast you can type. i haven't seen the roadmap that can not be finished by one pair of hands in 48-60 hours. hardest part - pay 3 btc to get listed on exhcange. might be a week. why would you stretch release of the wallet that is ready on the next year, 6 months after an exchange listing.

c) think about how the price develops around the project. in case of btc - its tech. so the same for every fork. miners spending resources mining and confirming, and etc. so if you have some solid tech - all you need is to release it and get listed on an exchange. market will set the price. but if you not confident in your project, or you know that it has no value - you will use ICO to setup desired price. example of good scam - https://www.coindesk.com/arisebank-ico-fraud-case-may-ensnare-additional-parties/?utm_content=buffer894d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

d) white paper is something that you would want to put in frame. its an idea of your project. academical representation, if you want. but looking at all the current flow of projects - most of them dedicated over 65% of the content to expanded budget program and referral system.

e) this might be tricky. but its a very common flag. im seeing people stating like "oh, yeah maybe looks similar. but its fine.". its not. companies getting sued regardless geographical location (!). and its not okay even if its just a little similar. one of my favorites from 2017 year https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/22/15678296/paypal-pandora-lawsuit-logo-design

f) i guess this is already explained in part c)

g) the reason i got into cryptocurrency was the open source. like to read. but since the tech is still in experimental state - it requires some skills to feel comfortable around the environment. so if you don't know how something works - you study first. but what can be observed right now - armies of masternodes with blind operators who's running everything from root and then questioning disappearance of their funds. but devs don't want you to learn. or you would figure out what they are actually doing.

this is based on data and observations from jan 2016 to dec 2017.

I think that on white paper, prices and the road map, everything else is essentially deeply secondary. Well, even IVF itself can be a determining factor.

[Mrs Troll]

I may suggest also use so calling "crowd opinion" with services like this https://tokensrecord.com/redflags - another potential investors could spot something that you miss and published it to project's page.

[charlie137]

I may suggest also use so calling "crowd opinion" with services like this https://tokensrecord.com/redflags - another potential investors could spot something that you miss and published it to project's page.

it is very obvious the crowd follows the hype. and all the services needs to pay for servers, so you looking at shifted opinion as well. for instance - some masternodes charts openly sending devs offers to move their coin up the list for a fee. so i wouldn't trust any information besides neutral opinion on discussion boards or personal research.

this is just like pnd groups. think about the motivation

[Caesar-Giulius]

Thanks for putting up the guide, this will be useful for us to identify potential project scams.

[aalborg]

That's a really useful guide, thanks. Basically I pay attention  to all of these points exept github, as I don't have any knowlegde of this field. So, I will better save it and print in order to select projects deliberately

[maremostro]

All above mentioned is worth taking into account but also follow your heart and try to pick the ones that will bring something to the industry expand it therefore increase  overall market cap
Read about Kepler Technologies Huge project by comparison to others by Hard Cap . It could be a bulls eye

[nextel]

There are indeed a lot of factors to spot red flag ICOs and projects in the market but in my own experiences I would never waste my time into spending research and roam around their websites because  scammers can make better websites than legitimate ICOs.
For me, I would rather bump into their Social Communities like Telegram Channels because telegram channels has low number of members and seems there's no active members and admins then that's the Red flag that I am talking about.

[charlie137]

There are indeed a lot of factors to spot red flag ICOs and projects in the market but in my own experiences I would never waste my time into spending research and roam around their websites because  scammers can make better websites than legitimate ICOs.
For me, I would rather bump into their Social Communities like Telegram Channels because telegram channels has low number of members and seems there's no active members and admins then that's the Red flag that I am talking about.

this might let you down if the developers are busy working on the project than doing pr) basically thats how it should be. why would there be a huge base if the project is just started? if that crowd is remaining on the server for a long time - this might be a sign that something's going on. but i wouldn't look for something that shouldn't be there at the first place. as was confirmed before by our current big players on the market - good project will grow with the community by itself. but when its forced - this is something that might be worth looking into

[charlie137]

That's a really useful guide, thanks. Basically I pay attention  to all of these points exept github, as I don't have any knowlegde of this field. So, I will better save it and print in order to select projects deliberately

no probs!) github looks complicated at first, but if you will compare different branches of major project with its forks - you could get a lot of information just from a visual review. then step by step reading more, and you will find yourself in the middle)) the reason we have so much scam is because it was never been that easy for scammers to make things look complicated. this is just basics that you can find in a way any contract is written these days. people seeing new masternode coin with already high price, and they selling their property to get in not doing any research just in fear of wasting time researching while price go up. this is just scary)