Current ICO's rating systems. What do you think?

[Cotton Candy]

What do you guys think of the current ICO's rating system? Are you satisfied/happy? Do you think it reflects the real projects value? Does it help you to find right ICO's to invest to? What do you think about experts (even very well known ones) who provide corrupted ratings?
There are way too many questions. Let's discuss)

as I would like to think considering ico rating or any words from some impact individuals won't influence me to accept 100%. every one of them had their own business and purposes. you should simply just make your own exploration on some ICO to choose great one from it and im beyond any doubt it will more fulfill you when you take your benefit from your speculation.

[1714053756]

1714053756

[1714053756]

1714053756

[1714053756]

1714053756

[1714053756]

1714053756

[Ahooleeman]

What do you guys think of the current ICO's rating system? Are you satisfied/happy? Do you think it reflects the real projects value? Does it help you to find right ICO's to invest to? What do you think about experts (even very well known ones) who provide corrupted ratings?
There are way too many questions. Let's discuss)

as I would like to think considering ico rating or any words from some impact individuals won't influence me to accept 100%. every one of them had their own business and purposes. you should simply just make your own exploration on some ICO to choose great one from it and im beyond any doubt it will more fulfill you when you take your benefit from your speculation.

Do you think the current rating system should be changed?

[karthcrypt]

Getting a good ICO to invest in is not a  question of rating rather, it's deliberate attempt to find out the best ICO project out there that will support your believe and have potential for real return on your investment.

[rltim555]

I hate current rating system! People see these corrupted estimations and then make an investment decision based on these 5 star rating. The only trusted agency is ICO drops. Although they are russians, they don't allow russians projects to be listed, because such projects tends to be failing

[vova.andreyan.94]

Quite doubtful ratings on ICObench, because sometimes bad projects sometimes have a good rating and do not even collect a softcap.

[goodluck0319]

they need to pay attention, but not the most important thing. most often shoot those projects that have one unknown expert

[jhache]

What do you guys think of the current ICO's rating system? Are you satisfied/happy? Do you think it reflects the real projects value? Does it help you to find right ICO's to invest to? What do you think about experts (even very well known ones) who provide corrupted ratings?
There are way too many questions. Let's discuss)

I do not look at any ICO rating except the one that I make from doing my own research. One thing that I have come to realize is that these ICO rating websites can simply be paid to give good ratings to certain ICOs even if they are not that good. Money speaks. That is why it is best for everyone to learn to research into the ICOs they want to invest in by themselves.

[Ucy]

None I know is up to standard as far as transparency is concerned. Most of the websites are controlled by a person or few individuals.

Crypto World is a bit disorganized at the moment. The current creators of Cryptocurrencies are not ready to let go of their hold on "Decentralized" projects. There are lot of businessmen in Crypto world these days but very few ideological developers.
I think having decentralized rating sites with good reputation system could solve most of the problem especially the transparency issue. There should be set Standards which new Projects that want to be taken seriously must pass through.
The Standards should be created, debated on and set by the Community. [Community could be made up of Developers of top 100 Cryptocurrencies. The developers have to discuss things first within their various communities. For example: Bitcoin main devs agree within their community which standard should be agreed on.]

Some of my set Standards:
1. Project must be Original and Authentic .. . & possibly Unique .
2. How technically sound the project is % (in percentage)
3. Project viability %
4. Project must be well Decentralized % (how Decentralized?)
5. Whitepaper must be free from plagiarism.
6. Coin should not be premined above x percentage.
7. There should be Proof of concept or something.
8. Developer/Developers should be X experienced.
9. How hack proof or secure is the project % (in percentage)
Etc...

* Rating Standards can be divided into different layers as numbered above. Project/ICO would pass through each layer and get rated by algorithm and human evaluators.
*The raters or evaluators should be good algorithms and people with well deserved reputation.
* Human evaluators could be paid in the system Coin.
* System should be designed in such a way that Human evaluators who are found ignoring, over-rating or under-rating are automatically kicked out or suspended.
* Rating from Algorithm should placed side by side of the rating of human. Example: final rating of a particular ICO/Project could be like this:
Algo Rating = 38%
Human Rating = 42%
* Project that wants to pass through rating should purchase reasonable amounts of the system Coin.

[ShareAccepted]

Some of this ratings are based on objective things such of number of followers and so on. But also the rating is included of biased components, like reviews, advisers. So there is too much room for fraud.

Some of the rating pages do give a little bit more of trust and checking, mostly those related to strong and long standing review with plenty of valuations and a check for the ICO teams.

[DarkBullet]

Those crypto ratings are only used as a badge to be displayed on their website just to make their platform interesting or to make their project more convincing that it has a future in the market. After the ICO, those ratings were just a bluff and you will end up disappointed. The higher the ratings, the higher the money they paid to that website. Video updates with the project is more convincing for me than those fake ratings.

[GodHatesFigs]

I advise you not to trust the ratings, but to conduct the analysis of projects personally.

[Dexion]

yes, it helped me find an ICO project with good progress in the future. especially now, when many scam ICO, but I don't fully trust the ICO rating, because sometimes it's just project manipulation.

websites and whitepapers always become a barometer to see the good ICO.

[lotao]

I don't believe in the rating platform. I think the rating platform definitely needs income since it takes time to sort it out. So this may lead to the objectivity of the rating company.

[devilzero]

With the emergence of a large number of ICO projects, the current rating system can no longer satisfy the reference of authenticity and development potential. A better rating system needs to be developed.

[Asmus003]

I think that famous ICO ratings can`t describe the real picture, because everyone can buy this "rating". BUT I can check real scams there and it`s very good for me.

[Ariess]

What do you guys think of the current ICO's rating system? Are you satisfied/happy? Do you think it reflects the real projects value? Does it help you to find right ICO's to invest to? What do you think about experts (even very well known ones) who provide corrupted ratings?
There are way too many questions. Let's discuss)

of course Current ICO rating systems can be a reference in every research and analysis, you are made easy in every choice even though you have to keep researching it and reading white paper as your trace for investment.

[Star_Bucks]

What do you guys think of the current ICO's rating system? Are you satisfied/happy? Do you think it reflects the real projects value? Does it help you to find right ICO's to invest to? What do you think about experts (even very well known ones) who provide corrupted ratings?
There are way too many questions. Let's discuss)

ICO rating systems is very reliable and honest about ICOs that are rated in the website. But when investing don't depend on ICO rating systems because even though they are reliable you still need to think by yourself whether you will invest or not

[Ahooleeman]

I think that famous ICO ratings can`t describe the real picture, because everyone can buy this "rating". BUT I can check real scams there and it`s very good for me.

Any ideas for the new rating system?

[Ahooleeman]

Foxico is here with amazing news! The new web site version is ready. 

The main feature integrated in the new logic is that ALL projects now can be rated by community members. Thus all ratings will be the reflection of community opinion. 

NO MORE AFFILATE/ CORRUPTED/ UNFAIR RATINGS!

Join Foxico, rate projects and share your opinion with others.

To see the new logic description please take a look

 https://foxico.io/howitworks 

We are constantly working on the development so please follow our news to stay informed when additional sections are ready.

Please note - We have not moved user database so you have to register again.

NOTE: If you added a project to the old Foxico and would like to edit details - use the same email for registration or contact edit@foxico.io from the email you set as a contact mail for a project.

[RyanDMC]

I tend to trust most of the ICO rating websites but I can definitely imagine that some of them are being paid to promote some projects, after all, this is internet.