A suggestion for ICO promoters and bounty managers

[deppil90]

Team admin bitcointlak must selectively tighten the rules for each ico project that will be published in the forum, as the project must be real, the project team is clear, and the community and partners are adequate. to keep and keep investors away from fraudulent projects.

[1714520106]

1714520106

[1714520106]

1714520106

[1714520106]

1714520106

[1714520106]

1714520106

[Jukukalotorol4ud4]

~snip`
I have a few suggestions to resolve some of the issues, before the issues go out of hand.

1. There should be a requirement that if anyone want to post an ANN in Bitcointalk, he must deposit 0.1% of the total amount (of the softcap) in an escrow account. For example, if a project is planning to raise $50,000,000 from the investors, then before creating the ANN thread the promoters must deposit $50,000 in either BTC or ETH to an escrow account held by the Bitcointalk staff. If the soft-cap is smaller, like $500,000 then the escrow amount should be 0.1% of that, i.e $500. If the promoters vanish, then this amount should be forfeited. Also, if the promoters go back on their promises once the tokens are listed, then this escrow amount should be frozen and may be (partially) released only if they achieve the objectives which they had promised earlier.

~snip~

Very good idea

But for suggestions  no. 1
It seems that it will be burdensome for project owners in carrying out their work because they need the funds to continue to promote and in other development frameworks

It might be better to use trusted escrow in raising ICO funds so that investor funds remain safe if something unexpected happens

[trns.txt]

I love your solution / suggestion for ICO promotors and bounty managers. Many people have got many losses following scam IOCs, including me. So, I am sure your suggestion will bring a better change in bounty system. I really hope, it can be implemented.

Below, I try to analyze it:

1. A lot of scam projects are creating bounty campaigns and ANN threads. Once the bounty campaign is finished, they vanish all of a sudden without paying the bounty hunters and leaving the investors in limbo.

I experienced many times to see a bounty manager from a bounty program is taken from the team members of an ICO project. And the result when the bounty program ends, he leaved the bounty program together with all the project team members. I want to say that, It is very risky when a bounty manager is taken from an ICO project. Moreover, the project doesn't spend a lot of money to do that. They will disappear easily.

By having deposit 0.1% of the total amount (of the softcap) in an escrow account, we can lessen their chance of leaving.  

2. The quality of the bounty managers have gone down. Junior level members are acting as bounty managers and they often don't update the spreadsheets and sometimes indulge in cheating by enrolling proxy accounts to the campaign.

It is true. There are some bounty managers with Junior level currently, and personally I don't know well who they are.  
Yes, we need a list of trusted and experienced bounty managers with good track records. And all people can see the list easily to remind them. It can be a guide to choose a project with good bounty manager.

 
3. Large number of newbs are signing up for bounty campaigns, often enrolling using purchased Facebook / Twitter accounts (esp. in Social media bounty). The quality of posts being done by the bounty campaign participants have gone down quite a lot during the last few months.

To be honest, you said a truth. Many purchased social media accounts. It because of the prices of the social accounts quite affordable. We need KYC or something like KYC for this case, to minimize the fraudulence.

4. Even those bounties which pay end up listing at 80% or 90% discount to their original prices and in the end the honest bounty campaign participants end up with very small rewards. On the other hand, those signing up with 10-12 multiple accounts end up with sizeable rewards. And it is the latter category, which indulges in token dumping.

Yes, the problem of multiple accounts seems hard to solve. Especially in signature campaign, as we know many signature campaigns have big rewards. When someone joined a bounty project with multiple accounts, It can harm other participants. Moreover It can trigger to dumping, the token price is very low / cheap.

5. There is no incentive to hold on to the tokens, as a majority of the ICO promoters dump their tokens in the market and vanish. If you check, the vast majority of the listed ICOs are in a dormant or defunct state now.

This is a very bad result. I know it, many worthless tokens on exchanges. They have no prices, and seem to dead. The promoters just need big profits, don't really take attention to the community.  

[HarryBeroe]

5. KYC must be mandatory for ICO promoters and bounty campaign managers (unless they are on level 2 DT). If this is done, then the scammers won't be able to set up multiple fake ICOs.

I agree with you, and in my opinion if KYC can be applied in every bounty. In addition to reducing scammers who do fake ICOs, they can at least regulate miners who have more than one account.

[disconnectme]

I think most of your points listed above are Germaine but the issue is we are in a capitalist system and people should be given the opportunity to choose what to do, i know BCT staff don't want to be seen has been to strict or preventing people from growing on this forum that is why they come about the merit system but with the merit system also there is a Mattew effect in play here

[fulled]

Im agree for almost all your point, but i disagree if bounty hunting payment should be in major coin, im personaly prefer to be paid in tokens, simply because i think its the way to investing since early stage, if buyer using thier money to buy an ico, ive using my skill to 'buying' an ico.

But once again, im agree with you in many points

[smileflowers]

We need to list all the bad bounty managers. Let everyone not join these bounty projects.

[ityandsyn]

Being a member of Bitcointalk for more than 6 years, I am quite a bit bothered by what happening in the bounty section for the past few months. This is what I have noticed:

1. A lot of scam projects are creating bounty campaigns and ANN threads. Once the bounty campaign is finished, they vanish all of a sudden without paying the bounty hunters and leaving the investors in limbo.

2. The quality of the bounty managers have gone down. Junior level members are acting as bounty managers and they often don't update the spreadsheets and sometimes indulge in cheating by enrolling proxy accounts to the campaign.

3. Large number of newbs are signing up for bounty campaigns, often enrolling using purchased Facebook / Twitter accounts (esp. in Social media bounty). The quality of posts being done by the bounty campaign participants have gone down quite a lot during the last few months.

4. Even those bounties which pay end up listing at 80% or 90% discount to their original prices and in the end the honest bounty campaign participants end up with very small rewards. On the other hand, those signing up with 10-12 multiple accounts end up with sizeable rewards. And it is the latter category, which indulges in token dumping.

5. There is no incentive to hold on to the tokens, as a majority of the ICO promoters dump their tokens in the market and vanish. If you check, the vast majority of the listed ICOs are in a dormant or defunct state now.

I have a few suggestions to resolve some of the issues, before the issues go out of hand.

1. There should be a requirement that if anyone want to post an ANN in Bitcointalk, he must deposit 0.1% of the total amount (of the softcap) in an escrow account. For example, if a project is planning to raise $50,000,000 from the investors, then before creating the ANN thread the promoters must deposit $50,000 in either BTC or ETH to an escrow account held by the Bitcointalk staff. If the soft-cap is smaller, like $500,000 then the escrow amount should be 0.1% of that, i.e $500. If the promoters vanish, then this amount should be forfeited. Also, if the promoters go back on their promises once the tokens are listed, then this escrow amount should be frozen and may be (partially) released only if they achieve the objectives which they had promised earlier.

2. There should be a list of approved bounty managers and those outside this list should not be allowed to act in this role. There are a lot of trusted bounty managers here, like Yahoo62278 and Lutpin. I don't think that newbs should be given priority over them.

3. In order to participate in a bounty campaign, it should be mandatory for all the users to post their ETH address in the "Location" field in the profile. I have noticed a large number of spammers using someone else's BTT account and their own ETH address to enroll in to social media bounties. This step will put and end to the practise and will weed out the spammers.

4. All the bounty campaign participants must be carefully screened before the payout. In order to prevent token dumping, a few steps can be taken. Since the bounty reward is 1% to 3% of the total amount, the promoters themselves can purchase this portion from the exchanges. Or they can make the bounty payments in BTC/ETH. There should also be a condition that the promoters should hold on to 90% of their tokens for at least 12 months. (Because I have noticed that it is the promoters who do dumping in the vast majority of the cases, and they blame it on the bounty hunters).

5. KYC must be mandatory for ICO promoters and bounty campaign managers (unless they are on level 2 DT). If this is done, then the scammers won't be able to set up multiple fake ICOs.

I am posting this because now the real impact is becoming obvious. Experienced users are staying away from bounty campaigns and even very promising ICOs are getting listed at heavily-discounted rates. This can't go on forever.

Good ICOs need to be protected from the negativity in the market created by the fake ICOs.
Honest bounty hunters needs to be protected from the cheaters
Properly run bounty campaigns and airdrops should be appreciated and differentiated from the poorly managed ones.

       You've posting a very sentiments and understandable thoughts but I have only a little suggestion on bounty managers which plenty of them having low rank , so I may suggest that it is better if bounty managers will be from sr.member up to legendary .
       I'm not in favor of submitting our documents for kyc but I  suggest to have e-mail  verification .

[didaiman006]

I strongly agree with your suggestion especially about bounty hunters.
Honest bounty hunters deserve protection from cheating.
many cases of bounty hunters who work for months don't get paid at all due to fake ICOs or fraudulent bounty managers.
Bounty hunters are also people who need money to meet their life's needs.

I also have suggestions for bounty managers, namely about KYC for bounty participants that are announced after the bounty campaign ends.
in my opinion, KYC requirements should be announced at the beginning of the bounty campaign not at the end.

[Kirana21]

5. KYC must be mandatory for ICO promoters and bounty campaign managers (unless they are on level 2 DT). If this is done, then the scammers won't be able to set up multiple fake ICOs.

i agree with this , i working on bounty hunter in found many fake bounty manager he using cheat with corruption alocation for bounty using fake account

[bryant.coleman]

We need to list all the bad bounty managers. Let everyone not join these bounty projects.

Rather than listing the bad bounty managers, it may be easier to list the good ones. Because there are thousands of scammers out there and if someone is blacklisted then the scammers can easily find a replacement. A good idea may be to limit the qualification to DT2 or higher.

[malphite534]

Good opinion for me to go forward for being a bounty hunter if some ico is scam it's part of our work to go on it. It's a big mistake for being not paid in ico if the project will crash because we pick it on our way of some different ico.

[zulkarnaen]

This thread is great, master!
The points are totally the same to what happened here nowadays.
If the promotors and bounty managers have the same idea as you, I think there will not be any scammers hanging around here. 

[happyme1818]

I agree on other suggestions but I don't agree with KYC implementation. We all know that personal information is a very sensitive information that I cannot afford  to compromise. In terms of dumping of coins, I don't believe that the bounty participants are the main reason of dumping of value because the campaign allocation is so small compared to investors and team allocation.

[jrrsparkles]

We need to list all the bad bounty managers. Let everyone not join these bounty projects.

Rather than listing the bad bounty managers, it may be easier to list the good ones. Because there are thousands of scammers out there and if someone is blacklisted then the scammers can easily find a replacement. A good idea may be to limit the qualification to DT2 or higher.

We have some threads regarding who are the good bounty managers in the service discussion sections and also I have read a thread about bad managers as well but they are not sole responsible for scam maybe they also can be vitim too so it important to be a good analyst before joining on any bounties.

[george_hured]

I am sure that today we need to say that bounty managers and bounty hunters really do their job, but the most important thing is that today we are being deceived and this is a problem that we need to talk about.

[Deptkolektor]

Being a member of Bitcointalk for more than 6 years, I am quite a bit bothered by what happening in the bounty section for the past few months. This is what I have noticed:

1. A lot of scam projects are creating bounty campaigns and ANN threads. Once the bounty campaign is finished, they vanish all of a sudden without paying the bounty hunters and leaving the investors in limbo.

2. The quality of the bounty managers have gone down. Junior level members are acting as bounty managers and they often don't update the spreadsheets and sometimes indulge in cheating by enrolling proxy accounts to the campaign.

3. Large number of newbs are signing up for bounty campaigns, often enrolling using purchased Facebook / Twitter accounts (esp. in Social media bounty). The quality of posts being done by the bounty campaign participants have gone down quite a lot during the last few months.

4. Even those bounties which pay end up listing at 80% or 90% discount to their original prices and in the end the honest bounty campaign participants end up with very small rewards. On the other hand, those signing up with 10-12 multiple accounts end up with sizeable rewards. And it is the latter category, which indulges in token dumping.

5. There is no incentive to hold on to the tokens, as a majority of the ICO promoters dump their tokens in the market and vanish. If you check, the vast majority of the listed ICOs are in a dormant or defunct state now.

I have a few suggestions to resolve some of the issues, before the issues go out of hand.

1. There should be a requirement that if anyone want to post an ANN in Bitcointalk, he must deposit 0.1% of the total amount (of the softcap) in an escrow account. For example, if a project is planning to raise $50,000,000 from the investors, then before creating the ANN thread the promoters must deposit $50,000 in either BTC or ETH to an escrow account held by the Bitcointalk staff. If the soft-cap is smaller, like $500,000 then the escrow amount should be 0.1% of that, i.e $500. If the promoters vanish, then this amount should be forfeited. Also, if the promoters go back on their promises once the tokens are listed, then this escrow amount should be frozen and may be (partially) released only if they achieve the objectives which they had promised earlier.

2. There should be a list of approved bounty managers and those outside this list should not be allowed to act in this role. There are a lot of trusted bounty managers here, like Yahoo62278 and Lutpin. I don't think that newbs should be given priority over them.

3. In order to participate in a bounty campaign, it should be mandatory for all the users to post their ETH address in the "Location" field in the profile. I have noticed a large number of spammers using someone else's BTT account and their own ETH address to enroll in to social media bounties. This step will put and end to the practise and will weed out the spammers.

4. All the bounty campaign participants must be carefully screened before the payout. In order to prevent token dumping, a few steps can be taken. Since the bounty reward is 1% to 3% of the total amount, the promoters themselves can purchase this portion from the exchanges. Or they can make the bounty payments in BTC/ETH. There should also be a condition that the promoters should hold on to 90% of their tokens for at least 12 months. (Because I have noticed that it is the promoters who do dumping in the vast majority of the cases, and they blame it on the bounty hunters).

5. KYC must be mandatory for ICO promoters and bounty campaign managers (unless they are on level 2 DT). If this is done, then the scammers won't be able to set up multiple fake ICOs.

I am posting this because now the real impact is becoming obvious. Experienced users are staying away from bounty campaigns and even very promising ICOs are getting listed at heavily-discounted rates. This can't go on forever.

Good ICOs need to be protected from the negativity in the market created by the fake ICOs.
Honest bounty hunters needs to be protected from the cheaters
Properly run bounty campaigns and airdrops should be appreciated and differentiated from the poorly managed ones.

       You've posting a very sentiments and understandable thoughts but I have only a little suggestion on bounty managers which plenty of them having low rank , so I may suggest that it is better if bounty managers will be from sr.member up to legendary .
       I'm not in favor of submitting our documents for kyc but I  suggest to have e-mail  verification .

Your posts are very good, and this can be very helpful for gift seekers. In order to be more careful in finding gifts. I'm still a beginner , and I'm very grateful for the posts you made. And I agree with you.

[Wale777]

You have proposed great solutions to the problems plaguing cryptocurrency in its entirety,  the part I love most is about the project team depositing a certain percentage of what they intend to raise to fund the implementation of their idea into an escrow account, that's going to be a very effective means of checking scam ICOs and secondly about cheaters on bounty registration, thorough screening should be adopted and the bounty managers too do some funny stuff on the spreadsheet, when we start having tested and trusted bounty managers, that's when there will be sanity in doing bounties and hard work will start paying off for genuine bounty hunters

[Torps1]

Your points are clear and good, if these problems are not checked when the situation is still bearable, then it may likely go out of hand. The greed for more cash is creating more problems and should be brought under control.

[bryant.coleman]

I agree on other suggestions but I don't agree with KYC implementation. We all know that personal information is a very sensitive information that I cannot afford  to compromise. In terms of dumping of coins, I don't believe that the bounty participants are the main reason of dumping of value because the campaign allocation is so small compared to investors and team allocation.

As I have already clarified many times, I don't want the bounty hunters to go through the KYC procedure. It's just for the ICO promoters, and to an extent the bounty campaign managers. Now if you are planning to raise $50 million or $100 million, then you need to take some responsibilities.