Would ICO scene succeed if it was organized like crowdfunding not investing?

[NathanJB]

I do not believe that the problem of ICOs is in the lack of trust from investors. For sure, such a fundraising method would attract more investors, but the biggest issue is postponed releases and bad exchange listings.

I don't agree. The biggest issues are certainly not postponed releases or bad exchange listings. Those two are not even within the ICO period anymore. The biggest issues when it comes to ICO are that most of them are scams, the others are copies only of existing projects, the others are not within quality level. And more than this, most of them failed or are gone after the ICO ends, some after the coins are listed to exchanges. There are no more active developers nor product improvements or releases.

[tenakha]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Without greed and big gains we will lose a lot of people from the community. We certainly have the choice to invest in thinking as you say but the ambition of big profits is more dominant than other feelings. Actually, if everyone is forced into such system, we will lose a lot of people, but we will have a stronger crypto environment. And we are not the only ones who need to struggle in this regard, so developers should be forced to do something about it too.

[mintme.com]

The problem in ICO is not that way, investors will continue to come and invest in many ICO if and only if scammers are not in the community.
ICO died because of may projects that turned out to be a scam and run with the money of investors!
We are in cryptocurrency "CURRENCY" and if we will be here for just helping or what then we are not true on what we want.
We are here to gain and get more profit as long as we can and scammers ruin all of it.

Sure, but currency can be used for different things. You can use currency for donations and for investing. Also I think people would be dissapointed even if project their invested in didn't turn out to be scam but simply failed. Even though when we discuss it, it seems more fair, for a person who lost money, it probably doesn't matter much if he lost it because he was tricked or because he invested in totally failed idea (or badly executed one)

[Obito]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Not a good idea though. Leavin' the money you set to invest and not even worrying if there's a guarantee of return. And there will be no one supposed to be responsible when it came differently than expected because the investor are okay with that. It is more like sending tons of donations. Healthy surroundings of investors but the projects itself are more like a charity rather than so-called project. Even if it lessens the complaints it will just serve as a turn point for scam projects to lure around, and do their thing because the benefit is big.

[fuer44]

in fact it is a very big risk because if the team fails to manage the funds obtained from the crowdfunding, it will actually have fatal consequences and even get to the legal channels.

[agentx44]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Everything happens for a reason and it is already on the past which means we can't change it anymore. Greed and lack of knowledge can be considered as one of the main reason why many experience scams or frauds. The only thing we can do about it right now is hope that ICOs would end up being more organized, fair and realistic when it comes to their promised gains. As a bounty hunter also, it is our responsibility to make sure we analyze very carefully the project we are going to join in.

[Bananington]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

This makes much sense with a very cool real life scenario. Obviously if ICOs were organised like the form of crowdfunding you mentioned, people won't bother much if the coin price dumps or not. But definitely people who supported a project by donations will want to see what product they develop for instance, more eyes will be on development rather than price speculations.

[mintme.com]

This makes much sense with a very cool real life scenario. Obviously if ICOs were organised like the form of crowdfunding you mentioned, people won't bother much if the coin price dumps or not. But definitely people who supported a project by donations will want to see what product they develop for instance, more eyes will be on development rather than price speculations.

This is exactly what I meant - less price focus and more actual product focus.

[mintme.com]

Not a good idea though. Leavin' the money you set to invest and not even worrying if there's a guarantee of return. And there will be no one supposed to be responsible when it came differently than expected because the investor are okay with that. It is more like sending tons of donations. Healthy surroundings of investors but the projects itself are more like a charity rather than so-called project. Even if it lessens the complaints it will just serve as a turn point for scam projects to lure around, and do their thing because the benefit is big.

Why do you think donators would not be interested in this project? I Think interest will be even more genuine because they will want it to succeed not because of personal gain but because they believe in what this project represents.

[3DBrushes]

I do not believe that the problem of ICOs is in the lack of trust from investors. For sure, such a fundraising method would attract more investors, but the biggest issue is postponed releases and bad exchange listings.

If the project is really good and worth to invest then people won't find the exchange bad. Even though a good project won't get listed on a shit exchange. After certain amount of volume the coin/token might also get listed on other exchanges.

[coin-investor]

If this is the case then developers will not have a hard time asking for money since nobody will complain that he's been scammed, this is our hard-earned money, it is just right that what we put will yield profit, there's no such thing as free money, the developers owed to their investors to give something in return, crowdfunding and investing for me is the same, there should be return on what you give, it's a give and take and not the other way around.

[Pearls Before Swine]

The problem with that mindset is it'd require an imaginary world, where investors wouldn't expect a return of any sort.

Right, that's *one* reason why a crowdfunding approach wouldn't work.  The other, more important reason is that these days ico devs don't have any truly original ideas and they're only creating tokens so they can make a profit from them.  The project details no doubt require some creativity to write, but honestly...what was the last project you saw that really had some kind of success because of what it was? 

If ico's were crowdfunded, you can bet that the whole ico space would quickly be ruled by Darwin, and the ridiculously stupid projects would never get a dime of funding.  It isn't a bad idea, but it just won't work.

[Zionatin]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Without greed and big gains we will lose a lot of people from the community. We certainly have the choice to invest in thinking as you say but the ambition of big profits is more dominant than other feelings. Actually, if everyone is forced into such system, we will lose a lot of people, but we will have a stronger crypto environment. And we are not the only ones who need to struggle in this regard, so developers should be forced to do something about it too.

Do we really though? I mean who are we really losing? Those people after big gains are throwing their money at scams which makes things worse, not better. They are foolish people and none of that crypto goes to the community. It all just gets dumped on the market by the scammers. Hopefully, people will wake up soon and start considering other options instead of just the first few they see that sound cool or look cool and just have good advertising.

[JeffBrad12]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Not a good idea though. Leavin' the money you set to invest and not even worrying if there's a guarantee of return. And there will be no one supposed to be responsible when it came differently than expected because the investor are okay with that. It is more like sending tons of donations. Healthy surroundings of investors but the projects itself are more like a charity rather than so-called project. Even if it lessens the complaints it will just serve as a turn point for scam projects to lure around, and do their thing because the benefit is big.

it feels like solving problem with an ineffective solution I mean people are screaming or shouting "scam" because they usually the one who get harmed and this could be considered as a social punishment so that no one will get lured into the scam project. crowdfunding is simply ridiculous are you really expecting to throw away your money for "support" to a stranger, there will always some people who don't give batshit about other people's wellbeing and if not for the regulation and law they'd have done crazy shit. this supporting thing is just ridiculous and stupid.

[zeze18]

Without greed and big gains we will lose a lot of people from the community. We certainly have the choice to invest in thinking as you say but the ambition of big profits is more dominant than other feelings. Actually, if everyone is forced into such system, we will lose a lot of people, but we will have a stronger crypto environment. And we are not the only ones who need to struggle in this regard, so developers should be forced to do something about it too.

Yes, people using crypto currency and investing on them because of the freedom and the anonymousity of crypto.
If the people feel forced or something that restrict their freedom, i'm sure people will leave and crypto will have a really hard time

[BonfireBob]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Well, firstly, IMO crowdfunding is not well organized if we speak about Kickstarter or other similar platforms, there are a lot of bad products/brands there which fund millions and then do not deliver the quality that they promise. Patreon is a bit different platform. It is created for supporting artists and creators that you like; it's not about getting something from them.

ICO's are like crowdfunding, you promise and later deliver, and a lot of projects deliver less than expected or do not deliver at all.

I think that a well organized ICO's with real teams and good ideas will always get funded. Sometimes good crypto projects even don't go to public sale and get private investors. So I think that at the moment what needs to be done is to educate people on how to spot the right investment and how to spot a SCAM, because there are a lot of them out there.

[Ferris419]

I don't think ICO projects are totally dead so we need this crowdfunding system. Rather ICO projects are not dead, if you look at the reputed ICO projects of this year then you might see Haratoken, BCNEX, Ferrum and some other ICO hit their cap very easily. Haratoken reached the hard cap within 36 hours, Ferrum reached their cap for less than 5 hours. Because these projects had something unique and real, so, people invested in a hurry! So, if you offer good ICO projects, you will be able to reach the sale cap!

[mintme.com]

it feels like solving problem with an ineffective solution I mean people are screaming or shouting "scam" because they usually the one who get harmed and this could be considered as a social punishment so that no one will get lured into the scam project. crowdfunding is simply ridiculous are you really expecting to throw away your money for "support" to a stranger, there will always some people who don't give batshit about other people's wellbeing and if not for the regulation and law they'd have done crazy shit. this supporting thing is just ridiculous and stupid.

helping others is ridiculous and stupid? well, patreon processed over 1 billion USD this year, so I think lots of people would disagree, besides like I said - yes you can get something in return, like higher rank account or some preloaded credits on platform you support

and I strongly disagree with view that helping others is stupid and ridiculous.

[Drai]

I think there is something fundamentally wrong with this idea, the fact remains that most people invest in projects for the profit so if it was done in a crowdfunding method, there would definitely be no investors, that defeats the purpose of the fundraising.

[xiboothrezi]

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam!" all the time.

then people who join are more accurately called donors than investors, right?  one of the goals of joining the project is to invest to support the project which is expected to provide positive feedback on investment development.