Is KYC For Bounty Hunters Good? Lets Share Our Views!

[Sylvial]

The recurrent fear of one's documents ending up in the wrong hands is the fear of many and the reason a lot bounty hunters stay away from bounties that require KYC to claim tokens. For some, it's better to lose once stakes and tokens to cheats, than losing one's identity to fraudsters who will use it for nefarious activities and the damages caused can take a lot of time to repair.

[LordShanken]

In recent times there has been several ICOs introducing KYC for bounty hunters, and that has made many Bounty hunters to feel bad.

I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.

The place I have issues with ICO projects running bounty programs is the idea of some projects that introduce KYC at the end of the bounty program which I really feel it should not be so. It is the same thing as those who used multiple accounts during the bounty because it will still reduce the amount the genuine hunters will earn.
If KYC should be introduced at the end of bounty, the left over coins/token should be distributed among the genuine hunters otherwise I see it as the same scam to the genuine bounty hunters:

Anyway, this is my own view, If you have a contrary view, please share it. I would like to know more also.

The decision regarding the KYC process for bounty hunters does not only depend on the dev team. This kind of decisions are reviewed by lawyers and project developers, just have to do everything in accordance with the law of the country in which the project is registered.

[AristoteI]

I think that this procedure should be mandatory only for investors. Because participants in the Bounty are usually people who do not invest their money in a project. They are not investors and therefore should not undergo this procedure.

[o_e_l_e_o]

The decision regarding the KYC process for bounty hunters does not only depend on the dev team. This kind of decisions are reviewed by lawyers and project developers, just have to do everything in accordance with the law of the country in which the project is registered.

I think you are giving far too much credit to the ICO market to suggest that lawyers are making decisions regarding KYC. I very much doubt the vast majority of ICOs have even considered the legal challenges of their project, let alone consulted a lawyer about them.

The majority of ICOs are scams, and the few that aren't usually have a completely unprepared and unknowledgeable team behind them that struggle to produce a coherent whitepaper or roadmap. They try to pay everyone in their worthless tokens because they want to spend as little money as possible on their trash project because they know it is likely to fail. There is no way they are going to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to have a lawyer look through their project and advise them on the intricacies of KYC requirements for bounty participants.

KYC for bounties is almost always so they can avoid paying or so they can steal your data.

[kingvirtus09]

KYC for bounty hunters are very annoying. It's unethical thing in the first place. Why would you announce KYC if the bounty ends has done? This is really pissed off.
That's why Dapps is the future among all the ICO, projects.

[bitcoinmar]

Never, the bounty hunter currently earns so little that it is possible to trade off personal information about someone or an organization on the internet. Because they can get that information and do a lot of things in the world

[pisston]

KYC for bounty hunters are very annoying. It's unethical thing in the first place. Why would you announce KYC if the bounty ends has done? This is really pissed off.
That's why Dapps is the future among all the ICO, projects.

in any case, to provide personal data ethical is not difficult. That's just really do not need to annoy users and warn about it in advance.

[MB2017]

KYC is good at some point like avoiding the scammers but need to be the process of KYC seamless means easy to do. Many ask for Full KYC and that takes really much time. Many ask for the KYC at the end of bounty and main fails to do KYC for their own reason and can't get the reward also. It's good if they announce in the starting. Major scammers, we found in the social media bounty more over the others bounty.

[JollyGood]

In recent times there has been several ICOs introducing KYC for bounty hunters, and that has made many Bounty hunters to feel bad.

I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.

The place I have issues with ICO projects running bounty programs is the idea of some projects that introduce KYC at the end of the bounty program which I really feel it should not be so. It is the same thing as those who used multiple accounts during the bounty because it will still reduce the amount the genuine hunters will earn.
If KYC should be introduced at the end of bounty, the left over coins/token should be distributed among the genuine hunters otherwise I see it as the same scam to the genuine bounty hunters:

Anyway, this is my own view, If you have a contrary view, please share it. I would like to know more also.

By having KYC how exactly would that be conducive to any bounty program unless it applies to the bounty manager in order to give confidence to bounty participants?

[Pamahaw]

I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.

Yes, KYC is never been a bad idea considering that there are a lot of cheaters today but the timing on when they ask for KYC is the one that frustrates bounty hunters. Asking for KYC documents after the bounty campaign is very frustrating to bounty hunters.

[Vieni]

As a bounty hunter i have no problem doing kyc. This kyc procedure is good so as to avoid members who do bounty with multiple accounts. But they should clearly state from the start that the bounty campaign needs kyc.

[Mr.ZODIAC]

As a bounty hunter i have no problem doing kyc. This kyc procedure is good so as to avoid members who do bounty with multiple accounts. But they should clearly state from the start that the bounty campaign needs kyc.

and I would also like to be sure that such a Bounty company will bring a really good income so that the risk of providing personal data is justified.

[JollyGood]

Who would feel happy sending their ID to bounty managers?

Not me

[Deewhy50]

Asking for KYC on bounties is never a good idea,  a good bounty manager should be able to manage his/her bounty well with an accurate spreadsheet.  Asking https enter to upload documents is not necessary,  KYC is for the investors because their coin is distributed directly by the ICO team not from the bounty manager

[bitkanu]

Asking for KYC on bounties is never a good idea,  a good bounty manager should be able to manage his/her bounty well with an accurate spreadsheet.  Asking https enter to upload documents is not necessary,  KYC is for the investors because their coin is distributed directly by the ICO team not from the bounty manager

Totally wrong, sometimes there's an ICO that regulate  even for bounty hunter to submit their KYC because simply the project is distributing money to that people aswell.
It's not wrong though, what's wrong is when the ICO is scam and asking for KYC, our data could be stolen.

[OSEIBOATENG]

KYC has now widely being used in ICOs and I think its a nice idea and it is helping them. Now it has also being used in bounties and I think its also a good idea because it will help fish out those using multiple accounts for the bounties.

[KuyaBreezy]

I don't think it's very good for us, since one of the best things of cryptos are the anonymity, and the KYC requirement challenges that resolution, so I don't think it's necessary and even less for a bounty that probably won't succeed for that same reason.

[JollyGood]

Who would receive the KYC?

Is the ID going to be with the bounty manager or the actual company running the ICO? Or both?

Sending ID to "people over the internet" is not a good idea especially if it might be shared without consent.

[Sanugarid]

In recent times there has been several ICOs introducing KYC for bounty hunters, and that has made many Bounty hunters to feel bad.

I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.

The place I have issues with ICO projects running bounty programs is the idea of some projects that introduce KYC at the end of the bounty program which I really feel it should not be so. It is the same thing as those who used multiple accounts during the bounty because it will still reduce the amount the genuine hunters will earn.
If KYC should be introduced at the end of bounty, the left over coins/token should be distributed among the genuine hunters otherwise I see it as the same scam to the genuine bounty hunters:

Anyway, this is my own view, If you have a contrary view, please share it. I would like to know more also.

For other bounty participants it is just a waste of time but personally ,i do think that it would be better for bounty programs to promote KYC in order to promote fairness on bounty campaigns. Some people are using multiple accounts which is prohibited. Therefore, those who are using two or more accounts won't be able to receive their rewards from doing such thing.

[sacskate]

it is difficult in non english countries and make it difficult for teen bounty hunters to participate