|
April 11, 2018, 12:57:53 AM |
|
I think your suggestion goes against the very nature of having an open forum to discuss bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. What you’re proposing is essentially centralizing the method of filtering which projects are allowed and which aren’t, which leaves the discretion of new announcements and content up to staff members or moderators. This leaves a lot of room for personal opinions, and I’d hate to see a great project not get a fair shot because their reach on the forums may been limited due to bad blood between the campaign manager and a staff member, for example. Or the contrary; what if another BitConnect scenario happens, and it gets approved to be here and ends up running off with everyone’s money in the end. Who will be liable?
I don’t think it’s fair to leave the responsibility with the staff members. Not just for everyone else, but for them, as well. If I were staff, I would not want any liability whatsoever when it comes to ICO’s and new altcoins... I think the best method is the way that it currently is: allow each individual user to do their due diligence before they make a conscious decision to invest in the coin or join a bounty campaign.
Not to mention the amount of time it would take to filter through those applications... lol. I believe in Darwinism. Let the suckers either learn from stupid mistakes or filter themselves out of existence.
|