bad developers have tarnished ICO!

[OrangeII]

the platform is not to blame for this, and it is very precise, that all projects depend on the strategy, and the skills of the developer in running the project they founded. Well, there are many things that affect it, one of them is a lack of experience and a weak team.

many projects have things like that and make ICO look bad. maybe some ICO errors or the definition of a successful project can be seen in this article.

https://applicature.com/blog/token-offerings/ico-success-or-fiasco-mistakes-that-matter

however, a team that has good concepts, experiences, strategies, and responsibilities will make ICO better.

[1714993024]

1714993024

[1714993024]

1714993024

[1714993024]

1714993024

[1714993024]

1714993024

[1714993024]

1714993024

[gensol]

Especially the deployment of Ethereum based tokens. Scammers have used the already existing Ethereum blockchain to deploy countless scan projects. I think this thing should be regulated to curtail the rate of scam going on. Dapps can be verified before they get deployed on the blockchain.

[UniversityCoin]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

Scammers are increasingly discrediting the Ethereum platform for smart contracts. Already for many people the word ICO is associated only with scammers rather than making money. That is why so many investors began to attract those projects where the possibility of fraud is reduced to almost zero.

[Saisher]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

If after a year and you have been scammed you are still investing in ICO, you have yourself to blame, you are not learning how to distinguish the right project to a wrong one, if you cannot distinguish a good project from a true one, then it's better to not invest in ICO anymore and just concentrate in trading or investing in old coins.

[Mpamaegbu]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

The good old days of ICO you tried to paint here was the pre-2018 years. I witnessed a bit of it and that was a period most ICOs gave great ROI. There was hardly any coin that got listed on the CMC at that time for less than $1, no matter how lowly it was sold at ICO. It was a glorious time before fraudulent devs and their teams spoilt everything. It was this era that even gave rise to the market hitting above $800billion in cap. I am sure some people here don't even know there was a time the market got to that level, seeing it now at below $300b.

[upyem2k]

That's right. Bad developers ha e their own negative roles but theirs is not as bad effects as that of scammers that conduct ICOs to dupe unsuspecting investors.

[Burogh]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

I agree that the failure of the project to reach the target roadmap is the responsibility of the developer team. A lot happens after the sales of tokens reach the target, the developer team starts to not focus on the project and fails to produce a product or even starts to leave the project and create a new project with the aim of raising more funds

[J1mb0]

In fact it is very easy to generate tokens on the ETH series so anyone can issue their own coins, which is why there are many junk and scam projects. I think we should not invest in ICO at the present time.

[Bossfidelity]

In fact it is very easy to generate tokens on the ETH series so anyone can issue their own coins, which is why there are many junk and scam projects. I think we should not invest in ICO at the present time.

I agree with you on the idea that the process of creating smart contract is very simple which has increased the number of abandoned projects, but I doubt if people still invest on ICO considering the nature of the market and the influence of fake projects.

[kumala_abi]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

I agree that the failure of the project to reach the target roadmap is the responsibility of the developer team. A lot happens after the sales of tokens reach the target, the developer team starts to not focus on the project and fails to produce a product or even starts to leave the project and create a new project with the aim of raising more funds

we  often to see developers team only focus on fundraising, and they forget how to achieved their roadmap that already planned before.and when investors start leave them many complain to them, unfortunately they didn't give positive reponse to their community and even banned them in telegram group channel.

[ashraf79]

I think it is not like this, new projects such as ETH now a day need a lot of dev work and money to spend, and create token in ETH blockchain more easy and less costly.

[RealMalatesta]

Those developers were never meant to be good in the first place, they are just after the money like you said, and that is why some people are now turning the system to scam people, but I would not only blame the developers also.

I know that the platform has been designed to accommodate everyone because it is a decentralized system, but now that we have this situation, are you saying that ethereum cannot bend on their policy if they don’t bend on their policy or technology, they will lose their respect and relevance to binance chain that is doing due diligent before accepting any project.

I also blame the investors too who would not take their time to investigate a project well before they commit their money into it, many investors’ rushes into investment a lot.

[magnum cyber]

In fact it is very easy to generate tokens on the ETH series so anyone can issue their own coins, which is why there are many junk and scam projects. I think we should not invest in ICO at the present time.

I agree with you on the idea that the process of creating smart contract is very simple which has increased the number of abandoned projects, but I doubt if people still invest on ICO considering the nature of the market and the influence of fake projects.

in this case I think some investors still invest in ico but if the ico has a good working map and the products they offer are already on the market. so the risk is smaller because the token is already listed on the exchange. on the one hand I think investors know better what they have to do to avoid loss.

[Golftech]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

Scammers are increasingly discrediting the Ethereum platform for smart contracts. Already for many people the word ICO is associated only with scammers rather than making money. That is why so many investors began to attract those projects where the possibility of fraud is reduced to almost zero.

Many people are already disappointed with this kind of scamming practices, and it is the reason why many of the good investors are no longer interested to show support from any new projects that is being introduced. Developers are the most important part of any projects. Without their real interest with their works, then there's nothing to expect but being a trash and the project will die without any support from the industry.

[pandanaran]

The erc20 network platform is very vulnerable. I mean, someone can easily access or create their own token through this platform, but what's difficult is developing it. so there is no point if they make tokens but cannot be developed properly it will become junk tokens, so the essence of this problem is actually true that the developer is the main role in a project while investor funds are also important, because without investor funds the project cannot be built accordingly with their road map.

[nutriagrigia]

The erc20 network platform is very vulnerable. I mean, someone can easily access or create their own token through this platform, but what's difficult is developing it. so there is no point if they make tokens but cannot be developed properly it will become junk tokens, so the essence of this problem is actually true that the developer is the main role in a project while investor funds are also important, because without investor funds the project cannot be built accordingly with their road map.

if the project has a good team and a strong developer, then they will definitely find funds for the implementation of their project.

[WannaCry]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

I must agree with this.. those project are develop by those fraudsters.. the project is still there but those people who develop or founded it vanishes like bubble.. they make the ICO's as the gateway for their scams..

[JCviggen]

In fact it is very easy to generate tokens on the ETH series so anyone can issue their own coins, which is why there are many junk and scam projects. I think we should not invest in ICO at the present time.

I agree with you on the idea that the process of creating smart contract is very simple which has increased the number of abandoned projects, but I doubt if people still invest on ICO considering the nature of the market and the influence of fake projects.

in this case I think some investors still invest in ico but if the ico has a good working map and the products they offer are already on the market. so the risk is smaller because the token is already listed on the exchange. on the one hand I think investors know better what they have to do to avoid loss.

the problem is that in this market a lot of people are not smart investors and they don’t know at all what they need to do in order to save their money and increase it

[2Kool4Skewl]

In fact it is very easy to generate tokens on the ETH series so anyone can issue their own coins, which is why there are many junk and scam projects. I think we should not invest in ICO at the present time.

I agree with you on the idea that the process of creating smart contract is very simple which has increased the number of abandoned projects, but I doubt if people still invest on ICO considering the nature of the market and the influence of fake projects.

in this case I think some investors still invest in ico but if the ico has a good working map and the products they offer are already on the market. so the risk is smaller because the token is already listed on the exchange. on the one hand I think investors know better what they have to do to avoid loss.

the problem is that in this market a lot of people are not smart investors and they don’t know at all what they need to do in order to save their money and increase it

I agree.  You are completely right.  Because there are a lot of people on the market and most do not even know what they are doing here.  I'm not talking about how to invest smartly or analyze something.

[Caishen_Project]

You are actually right and very correct with your conclusion about the developers. The greediness of most developers caused what happened to ICO, most of them are only after getting rich quick without proper planning for their projects and after getting funds from ICO, they disappeared and causing pain for their investors.