KYC for ICO, is it good or bad idea?

[Adrin]

Those who promote the business always want to keep multiple accounts in their business. KYC is very important for any company, so that multiple accounts are not encrypted by multiple accounts. You can not found multiple accounts of people without KYC, so if KYC is not possible for a person to make multiple accounts, I think KYC is a very good system for which companies are a good company.

[seggardinggins]

ICO is the most important part of this project, so I think this is not a problem if the project uses KYC. I think this can be said to be necessary and can be said not because the most important is the funds that come in and how many investors join, not who the investors are. but if done I think there will be a reduction in investors because not all investors like to be complicated.

[abubakar.tapo]

KYC is only needed by those who plan to fraudulently manipulate our data in the future. In the future, when accounting and payment of taxes begins, then KYC will be necessary. KYC is currently a useless thing.

[Abuchi2]

I really like it you must pass your kyc before you will be accepted. Why because a lot of people are now faking things using many accounts to do one particular tasks which is bad.

[Michail.]

I believe that KYC makes sense for investors, but it is not necessary for participants of generosity companies, we don’t invest our funds here, but try to earn them, now the sale of documents for KYC is gaining momentum.

[Noizebtc]

Personally, I prefer to sidestep such projects that introduce a system of identity verification. Cryptocurrency is first and foremost the anonymity of anonymity but what if we give them our data?

[opalet]

KYC project both safety and breach of privacy. In the decentralized world of cryptocurrency, it is hard to imagine KYC to intervene.

I don't like the idea of KYC in cryptocurrency. All its meaning is lost, she has to be anonymous and decentralized.

[mihtju]

This is a good idea, but only if we are sure that our personal data will not fall into the wrong hands, otherwise it is quite dangerous.

[happyme1818]

I think it is a bad idea to have a KYC procedure in a decentralize world of cryptocurrency. Giving your personal information to unknown people will compromise your security. You are also not sure if those who collect the data are trusted or not because selling personal data in the darkness is rampant.

[xDispeLme]

I think that KYC for ICO is a bad idea and many projects have lost their investors because investors are not going to disclose information about themselves

[capableuwa1]

I agree with the fact that there's need for KYC in most ICO's today. Take a good example with our traditional financial institutions (banks) who mandatory carry out KYC exercise for all her customers. So KYC helps to prevent Bot from participating in ICO because there's always that one Whale who might probably want to buy everything and then dump once launch in exchange. KYC is good and I support it.

[djgtr]

I agree with you and it seems to me that this is a very good idea that will bring confidence in the project team to the ISO process. What is happening now in most iso projects is a scam. Investors do not know anything about the team, only their photos on the main page or the pages on social networks that may be fake.
But I also do not understand those investors who give their money to such and projects.

Same here, it needs to to KYC for ICO so tbat you will be able to function normally and think critically. That is the most important part so that you will be guided and know what are the do's and don'ts because you are in the process of getting to know and you can gather more investors to come with you all along.

[Osayo]

Majority of the replies I have seen in this similar KYC posts have never supported it. That means it is not a good idea. The majority of the people against it can't possibly be wrong.

[deodecagone]

Of course the project required KYC. But bounty hunters don't have to. Only now a lot of participants who are dishonestly conduct business on several participants on themselves, so  KYC is needed to better receive awards.

[Lilmon]

I think it would be one more obstacle to drive away potential investors, remember that most investors appreciate cryptocurrencies for their anonymity, and when you take that away, there is no longer much difference with the stock market, at least in the financial area, so I think it can be something harmful to the ecosystem.

[coinluisa]

I think is not bad because some of ICO need to protect their token or their project to some abuser that's why investor need to pass kyc even bounties now have to pass the KYC so cheaters can't get any reward.

[Haterstestbtc]

I like your idea of improving the legitmacy and confidence of the ICO project to boost the interest of supporters. But all this process are none sense if the said campaign is not merely capable in the investors choice like what happen this year a lot project is good but an unable to reach the hardcap because of lack funds to support.

[coino.org]

I don't like KYC for ICO. It is definitely not for me. I don't like it at all! By the way I have several documents, because i don't like to share my personal data and there is no problems in submitting fake KYC

[42K]

KYC also known as Know Your Customer is one of the best ways ICOs tries to fish out people trying to get more accounts. I think its good to do KYC during ICO.

[jozymens7]

I think so many people are using this Know Your Customer thing to get people's information for their own good. To me, before I will do a KYC in your ICO then I know the project Im dealing with.