Security deposits for Bounty threads

[Pmalek]

When you move into a new apartment you are often required to pay a security deposit. A guarantee of some sort for damages that could be caused by you - the tenant.

How about offering ICOs/ITOs an option to pay a security deposit as a proof of their legitimacy and good intentions. The security deposit would be kept in an escrow account for the duration of the campaign. In order for the deposit to be returned the campaign must have honoured all their promises to investors and bounty hunters alike. If not, the deposit remains in the escrow account and could be used as a means of a small compensation for the investor/bounty hunter.

I am not proposing it should be mandatory for all campaigns. It is just an option that can be activated by the ICOs to prove themselves.
Can this still lead to abuse? Yes it can. The campaign can still pay a deposit and end up scamming their investors/bounty hunters for more money. But if implemented properly and with a high deposit it could maybe work.

I don't really follow the Altcoin industry anymore but like it or not they are a big, if not the biggest section of Bitcointalk. Unfortunately resulting in a lot of spam as well.

I am curious to hear the communities opinion about this. Something similar might have been propose in the past, sorry if it's a repeat. I did a quick search but didn't find such a thread.

[1714835847]

1714835847

[Quickseller]

You can require this as being contingent on your participation in the ICO and/or bounty campaign.

This will never be implemented by the forum, as the forum does not moderate scams.

[Pmalek]

It shouldn't be moderated by the forum. Escrow deals are also not moderated by the forum. It is a deal between an escrow agent and the campaign.
A campaign who pays the deposit could advertise it through their thread with proof of payment to the escrow as an indication that they are a serious campaign. 

[khaled0111]

I can think of two major drawbacks.
First, an ICO is basically launched to raise funds, most projets will not be able to pay a security.
Second, it will be only beneficial for bounty hunters. Real investors don't start earning profits just after the ICO ends, it usually takes months if not years.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Based on what i saw in the past, Most of the ICO launchers barely have any funds to spend except a few bucks for hiring campaign managers, website creation and a few other things.
All the other hope lies in the hands of the investors/ token buyers. That's why you will rarely see them off bounty hunters BTC or any renown altcoin... All that is there to offer are their worthless tokens that are easy to create.
I like the idea, it can at least reduce on scammers but most of this ICO owners will have nothing to offer.
Probably they will just move to other forums or medium.

[akamit]

It shouldn't be moderated by the forum. Escrow deals are also not moderated by the forum. It is a deal between an escrow agent and the campaign.
A campaign who pays the deposit could advertise it through their thread with proof of payment to the escrow as an indication that they are a serious campaign. 

Currently many members of the forum providing escrow service but none of the ICO projects doing this as you proposed.
It is because there is no official announcement from the forum about the feature you are talking about. They just don't know that because the feature doesn't exist.

So when Bitcointalk will announce something like that then it will be an official announcement and they have to endorse the escrow providers and have to moderate the scams.

[Joel_Jantsen]

Depends on how big is the security deposit. Most of the scam ICO's will pay the security fee and use that as an excuse to show they're legit. The investors will have an impression that the ICO is verified by the forum since they accepted a security deposit from them. This is will just be seen as a way to commercialize form and wouldn't be effective.

[r1s2g3]

I do not think theymos want to interact with ICO in any way. Accepting  and guiding them to make a security deposit is far fetched idea.
Do you know that forum do not give ad slots to ICO for advertising in this forum. They have only their threads and sig campaign as a means of advertisement in this forum.

[Pmalek]

I can think of two major drawbacks.
First, an ICO is basically launched to raise funds, most projets will not be able to pay a security.
Second, it will be only beneficial for bounty hunters. Real investors don't start earning profits just after the ICO ends, it usually takes months if not years.

Both your points are valid but an ICO also has private funding stages and pre-ico events where they raise funds in BTC, ETH or other established currencies.
The deposit can be made after one of these stages. It can possible even be made in several instalments as the ICO stages progress.

So when Bitcointalk will announce something like that then it will be an official announcement and they have to endorse the escrow providers and have to moderate the scams.

I don't think the forum needs to do any additional work except from making an announcement if an idea like this gets implemented and possible making a list of trusted escrow agents who would be interested escrowing the deposited funds. If an ICO wants to use this service they would need to contact an escrow like any other user on the forum. Everything else would be handled between the escrow and the campaigns.

[Silent26]

The idea is interesting but not so sure if this will work. First, the amount of security deposit must be high or else ICO's/ITO's will just play around with it but this post by khaled0111 is also possible...

First, an ICO is basically launched to raise funds, most projets will not be able to pay a security.

I can't tell that this idea will succeed for the sake of bounty participants. I also suggest some ideas before that might avoid scams but it didn't succeed as well as scam is not moderated and it is not easy to implement.

My suggestion before is, every bounties and campaigns should be required to hire a trusted escrow or else it will be considered as scam. Though I can't find that topic/post now.

[palle11]

I am not proposing it should be mandatory for all campaigns. It is just an option that can be activated by the ICOs to prove themselves.

I guess what you are talking about is regulation and maybe 2fa which is not really a bad idea but I don't think the forum would do that as it left for users to do a scrutiny of what they want to be a part of. Thus, it is to their detriment because the forum don't moderate scam, you can only get the warning signals from the forum or members.

Hence, you might want to ask how to know a bounty/campaign that is likely to scam users and the signs to know are as follows:

A bounty/campaign thread opened and said to be managed by a newbie/member account without a trusted escrow.

A new bounty/campaign with high payout.

A bounty/campaign that is not organized or managed by a trusted manager in the forum.

Red flag from users posting on the thread

And some other signs you need to heed to.

[akamit]

So when Bitcointalk will announce something like that then it will be an official announcement and they have to endorse the escrow providers and have to moderate the scams.

I don't think the forum needs to do any additional work except from making an announcement if an idea like this gets implemented and possible making a list of trusted escrow agents who would be interested escrowing the deposited funds. If an ICO wants to use this service they would need to contact an escrow like any other user on the forum. Everything else would be handled between the escrow and the campaigns.

If the forum makes an official announcement then they have to mention the escrow providers name or at least write something like "use escrow services from this forum".

So what could be the consequences if an escrow provider runs away with the deposit? Who will be liable? Of course the forum will be liable and have to face whatever comes to admins in regards of amount low or high.

Now you may say "Don't you trust the current escrow providers?", the answer is, yes I do trust them, but not blindly.

Does anyone knows who is behind a username, where he lives etc... Remember master-p?

Yes, the forum can only list those escrow providers name when they know them very well, and that would be an endorsement. Thus, they have to moderate scams but it is very unlikely the forum will do.

Some bounties/sig campaigns using escrow services to fund the bounty amounts without even an official announcement from the forum to prove their legitimacy.

I'm not sure if I have explained it well the way I thought to be...

[libert19]

Forum was never meant as earning purpose, bounty campaigns just came along the way, if bounty hunters want to make sure their work get rewarded - choose good projects.

Scammy bounties will eventually go away if they find no participants.

[The Cryptovator]

First thing is, forum will never hold users fund and forum will never moderate scam or likely scam. So who will escrow fund? Unofficial escrow's? If yes then it's not forum related matter and no need implement any rules. If forum implement any rules then forum will have to escrow fund and moderate scam which is impossible for many reasons.

Unofficially anyone can do it, no need any force from forum. If people's not join without escrow then project will must use this service if really they need to promote. Question is how many hunters will follow? Even they care about themselves? Still now they have not put efforts to research scam or likely scam. So hunter will join even there is no escrow. That means unofficial guidelines will not effect on bounty campaign and no one will use that kind of service.

[theymos]

forum will never hold users fund and forum will never moderate scam or likely scam.

Correct.

I haven't put much thought into it, but something that might at least be acceptable would be to let anyone register as an "accreditor", and give them the ability to have their "seal of approval" or whatever added to threads. Different accreditors could have different standards, fees, etc., and good ones would build a good reputation. There are still many problems with that, though, and I'm not sure that it's worth the trouble.

[ankit10]

Mostly Bounty hunters don't care if ICO's are trusted or not they just join in all campaign to earn fast money. They earn tokens and sell them as soon as possible but there are some good bounty hunters too who try to check legitimate of ICO first before joining any campaign. But scammers have their own way to scam people.

The only way to prevent scam bounties is all BOunty hunters decide to not to join any bounty till Bounty start using ESCROW. Using Escrow is easy as we have many reputable and trusted Escrow on the forum.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

The things now trending in the crypto-ecosystem are just semi-centralized feature from KYC to escrow etc I get it scam reports are becoming a common thing and we're looking for ways to solve it but getting an endorsement, using escrow aka giving power the few is that the solution to the problem? I thought blockchain was all about decentralization but now all the community is after is how to go back to the old ways the fait currency system is been operated that's giving power the the few via KYC, ESCROW etc. Lets think of something new none of this thing worked perfectly before and they won't work now.

The future is blockchain (decentralization) lets think of new ways to make the system more decentralized instead giving back power to a selected few.

[erikalui]

This was discussed many times and this can create more scam ICOs/ITOs. By paying some money as security deposit, it makes it sound as if the ICO is valid and legit which will attract more investors and we shouldn't forget, these ICOs earn millions of dollars through their fundraising and to pay few thousands is not a big deal if they can create a big scam. The ICOs using Escrow too have not fulfilled their expectations.

[Pmalek]

If the forum makes an official announcement then they have to mention the escrow providers name or at least write something like "use escrow services from this forum".

No, bitcointalk should in no way propose or demand the campaigns to use Escrow X or Escrow Y. It is just an additional option that a campaign could take advantage of to show the community that they are a serious project looking to manage a serious campaign.
The forum is only saying: If YOU WANT, you can pay a fixed security deposit as an additional step to prove to our community that your project is legitimate and your intentions to our members are good. Contact a trusted escrow and use their services at your own risk.

So what could be the consequences if an escrow provider runs away with the deposit? Who will be liable? Of course the forum will be liable and have to face whatever comes to admins in regards of amount low or high.

The same consequences as if an escrow agent runs away with your money you sent to that escrow. It is no different. A scam accusation gets opened and if proven guilty the party gets tagged.

Some bounties/sig campaigns using escrow services to fund the bounty amounts without even an official announcement from the forum to prove their legitimacy.

That is true, yes. But none of the bounty campaigns do I think.

@Coolcryptovator
You are talking about 'Rules' and 'Forcing things from the forum's side'. Again, what I am proposing is not a new Rule and not a mandatory step. It is barely an 'Option' that you can use if you want to. Same way that you can use an escrow when buying/selling on the forum. But it is not mandatory for you to do so and nobody is forcing you. It is your choice.

@theymos
If the problem is that an announcement like the one I am proposing shouldn't come from the forum, what if it comes from a trusted escrow we have here? Or from a group of trusted escrows who have proven themselves in the past by holding X amounts of bitcoins in their accounts?

Mostly Bounty hunters don't care if ICO's are trusted or not they just join in all campaign to earn fast money. They earn tokens and sell them as soon as possible but there are some good bounty hunters too who try to check legitimate of ICO first before joining any campaign.

I don't like to put all bounty hunters in the same bag. Someone who shares facebook and twitter posts just by clicking the share button isn't the same as a genuine content creator, video and graphic designer/creator, translator etc. Nobody deserves to be scammed but they are still not the same.

[hugeblack]

The security deposit would be kept in an escrow account for the duration of the campaign. In order for the deposit to be returned the campaign must have honoured all their promises to investors and bounty hunters alike.

Did you mean that the money "The security deposit" is saved/escrowed by the forum?, I do not think so.
This quote by the manager.

The forum will never hold users’ money.

Right, I was just about to post that.

If you mean that the money "The security deposit" is saved by escrow service "any third-party." This approach has not succeeded in reducing scam.
In fact, there was a scam, even using escrow -----> BITMIXCOIN.IO scam confirmed: 16+ Bitcoin stolen