Why most crypto projects' team members are made public these days?

[X-ray]

I've noticed that most crypto projects have team members which are publicly known by the public. Projects like Ethereum, Cardano, Terra, and others have founders whose identities are known by everyone around the world. Wasn't Bitcoin designed by an unknown person (or group of persons) named Satoshi Nakamoto?

Bitcoin was completely different case than the altcoin project. Altcoin like ethereum, terra and etc were coming from the funding by investors. They need to reveal their identity to create project to be trusted by the investors.

If the pioneer cryptocurrency project has been widely successful without anyone knowing who the founder ever was, then why can't other projects do the same? I was surprised to see some centralized exchanges asking for the names of team members just to list a new coin. With ever increasing KYC/AML measures, I'm afraid the days where an unknown person launches a new crypto project are over.

DId you aware before if some already tried to did the same like what bitcoin has done in the past? Bitcoin is bitcoin. It's the first crypto that is very different with the new coin that claimed to be anonymous coin like bitcoin. These days the new anon coin = scam coin.

What are your thoughts about this? Will this greatly affect the decentralization of the whole crypto/Blockchain industry? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

The decentralization was only a gimmick except bitcoin.

[Adbitco]

Don't you think if Bitcoin was made public that would have been the end of crypto since Government trying puting eyes on it but Satoshi Nakamoto remains "anonymous" and this have been the secret for cryptocurrency survival today but many don't think of it. Now saying many projects revealing their teams, Yes of a truth they we all believed on transparency and straightforwardness therefore for their project to be known they all have to be identifiable (Centralization) looking closely most of the DeFi projects back has no revealed team but presently revealing to build a total transparency.

[tvplus006]

In the event that the project team is legal and sets ambitious goals, then the publication of the project team, if it includes members already known in the crypto community, adds credibility to such a project. In addition, it has been noticed that if a project does not publish information about the team, it may be perceived as a warning that such a project is a scam.

[savetheFORUM]

Even a doxxed team wouldn't be able to sustain it in the long term and there are several projects that proves that, having a team that is known in the space doesn't mean a guarantee, though these days only a selected one thrive. Can't say for sure if a pseudonymous project will be successful these days but that would depend on its use case I guess.

That unfortunately is the main reason why most of the projects that scam people come from nations that will not chase the criminals. Obviously even that is not a problem, because people who are in high criminal jailed rate end up still scamming people, like you could be in the UK which will jail you a long time for a financial crime and still scam people.

But mainly, all these scammers end up from the southeast Asia nations such as Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Singapore and all of that. If you see a project made from those nations, I highly suggest you to be careful about it because there is a good chance that you could be getting scammed from it. This isn't anything related to their race, it doesn't mean they are scammers, it just means their government is more lax about scammers, if governments were laxed in other nations, those people would have scammed more too.

[TheGreatPython]

I've noticed that most crypto projects have team members which are publicly known by the public. Projects like Ethereum, Cardano, Terra, and others have founders whose identities are known by everyone around the world. Wasn't Bitcoin designed by an unknown person (or group of persons) named Satoshi Nakamoto?

Bitcoin was completely different case than the altcoin project. Altcoin like ethereum, terra and etc were coming from the funding by investors. They need to reveal their identity to create project to be trusted by the investors.

There were a ton of "e-money" attempts way before bitcoin, just because it was the first one to actually succeed, doesn't mean that it was the first attempt ever, there has been others before and they all failed to gain any attraction because they all lacked blockchain part of it.

However, I agree with the part where you say that new coins with anonymous team look like scams, and I have to say that most of them are doing the wrong thing. I wouldn't personally prefer a coin that has a team that is known, I rather have a coin that has no team at all, fully decentralized, that would be a lot better and would play into the decentralization of crypto very well.

[BitcoinPanther]

I'm afraid the days where an unknown person launches a new crypto project are over.

I believe that the unknown developer era had been long gone since most projects nowadays are asking for money.  Seldom we can see projects today that never asked for initial sales of their zero-worth tokens.

What are your thoughts about this? Will this greatly affect the decentralization of the whole crypto/Blockchain industry? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

My thought is, that if someone asks for money, he must prove himself and investors should know the eligibility of the developer to deliver the promised roadmap, that is why investors need to know the people behind the project before investing.  I don't think the developer will affect decentralization if the project itself aims to be decentralized.  Just check the BTC network, developers aimed that BTC  has a decentralized blockchain so regardless if the developer is known or unknown, their goal is to preserve the BTC blockchain's decentralized nature.  The same goes for other blockchain projects.

[uneng]

In the event that the project team is legal and sets ambitious goals, then the publication of the project team, if it includes members already known in the crypto community, adds credibility to such a project. In addition, it has been noticed that if a project does not publish information about the team, it may be perceived as a warning that such a project is a scam.

That is the idea, to add more credibility to the project, consequently raising investors' confidence when investing on the cryptocurrency. But if we think carefully about this matter, it doesn't make much difference anyway to know who are the people behind a project. Knowing Do Kwon is behind LUNA didn't prevent people losing hundreds of thousands dollars. It probably has even made people lose more money, since they felt too confident because they knew the developer and invested more than they should.

Furthermore, almost every ICOs have a developer team section, displaying a picture and social medias of each of them. And once more, it doesn't prevent some of these projects stopping at the middle of the development and most of them being useless and unprofitable after the launchment.

After all, the effect is more at the marketing field than anywhere else.

[naira]

From this alone, we can see that the goals between Bitcoin and altcoins are far different. The existence of Bitcoin is the only one to support user anonymity, while altcoins including ETH, SOLANA, and others are centralized in order to be accepted in the eyes of investors due to influential developers. The story is very different now with no clear developer identity being considered an obscure project.

[goaldigger]

From this alone, we can see that the goals between Bitcoin and altcoins are far different. The existence of Bitcoin is the only one to support user anonymity, while altcoins including ETH, SOLANA, and others are centralized in order to be accepted in the eyes of investors due to influential developers. The story is very different now with no clear developer identity being considered an obscure project.

Security might be the issue here since investors wants to know the identity of the developer so they can know if that person is serious on this project or not. Look at those project with anonymous developer, most of them turned into a scam project and this is why this has been a big concern for the investors. You can still be anonymous by using those altcoins, its just that the developers are expose to the public and that could also be part of their marketing strategy.

[Renampun]

I've noticed that most crypto projects have team members which are publicly known by the public. Projects like Ethereum, Cardano, Terra, and others have founders whose identities are known by everyone around the world. Wasn't Bitcoin designed by an unknown person (or group of persons) named Satoshi Nakamoto? If the pioneer cryptocurrency project has been widely successful without anyone knowing who the founder ever was, then why can't other projects do the same? I was surprised to see some centralized exchanges asking for the names of team members just to list a new coin. With ever increasing KYC/AML measures, I'm afraid the days where an unknown person launches a new crypto project are over.

What are your thoughts about this? Will this greatly affect the decentralization of the whole crypto/Blockchain industry? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

this is what distinguishes between Bitcoin and Altcoins, that's the identity of the creator...

I also once thought that, why most altcoins founders today show their identity, the reasons I think are = (1) because they want to be known (their names are recorded in crypto history), (2) because they want a product (token/coin) ) they are known to investors, (3) so that there are no claims from others IMO.

[lalabotax]

I believe that the first reason is that because the altcoins are not Bitcoin that has the major focus and trust from the crypto community. Many people are scammed these days by new projects of altcoins. Many of them used fake team members. Based on the experience, it means that when we are going to choose a team, we will better choose the one that is clearly showing the real person than a fake one, right? Because if they are real, at least we know where they are, who they are, and they may be responsible. Additionally, if we know the team clearly, does it mean that we know their capacity to develop a project right?

[Xal0lex]

What are your thoughts about this? Will this greatly affect the decentralization of the whole crypto/Blockchain industry? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Regulators dictate rules to exchanges, governments dictate rules to regulators, and governments will never support anonymity, they need control. Team anonymity in the crypto world is already rather synonymous with scam, just remember the anonymous developer SushiSwap who left the project and withdrew 38,000 ETH from the project. Yes, he got it back, but many anonymous creators are just stealing liquidity and exchanges don't like it, because their reputation is threatened and also they get too much attention from regulators. They don't want to get involved in listing potentially problematic projects. Therefore, KYC teams are a kind of guarantee that the project will not become a scam.

[glendall]

I think it's a natural thing for a project to feature their team where there is a guarantee that we know who the owner of this coin is and what the CEO looks like.  and I think for a satohsi it's better not to give his real identity because it can make the world commotion

[albon]

Most members of the crypto project team are made public these days and the reason is simply because of the spread of many scam projects with unknown people behind them. strong projects want to be legitimate to win the trust of investors. The factor of trust and credibility is an important matter in forming the investor base. How will potential investors trust your project and believe in your expertise and the expertise of the team working with you while you are anonymous?

[coin-investor]

I've noticed that most crypto projects have team members which are publicly known by the public. Projects like Ethereum, Cardano, Terra, and others have founders whose identities are known by everyone around the world. Wasn't Bitcoin designed by an unknown person (or group of persons) named Satoshi Nakamoto? If the pioneer cryptocurrency project has been widely successful without anyone knowing who the founder ever was, then why can't other projects do the same? I was surprised to see some centralized exchanges asking for the names of team members just to list a new coin. With ever increasing KYC/AML measures, I'm afraid the days where an unknown person launches a new crypto project are over.

What are your thoughts about this? Will this greatly affect the decentralization of the whole crypto/Blockchain industry? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Times are changing its better that we know who are the developers of one project because there's too much scamming going on, Bitcoin's case is very much different it's the one that started it all, and besides these projects have done ICO and since we are in adoption stage the regulators will not allow them if they are not compliant with existing rules.

Part of the success of adoption is the regulation and compliance, many industries are creating their own token or adopting them for investors' protection we should know who the people we are dealing with are and are they capable of realizing what's on their roadmap.

[Uang_kartal]

In my opinion decentralization occurs in bitcoin and transactions all coin only on the blockchain network. It is completely private and cannot be tied or recorded by anyone. However, it is also transparent and recorded in a checking account in each of its cryptocurency networks.
especially the founders, for example Terraform, ETH (the first to introduce the owner), Solana etc. Maybe they think that knowledge is important and part of the project's marketing to encourage new fans.

Of course, if something unexpected happens (happens with various kinds of assets) we can know the mastermind and the latest information from the founder.

indeed this may not be a concept in decentralization, at least we can get to know and know the latest info on certain coins or networks.

The positive result of being anonymous like this satoshi can also be for the sake of protecting the founder, for example, investors cannot blame and criticize anything. also social security for founders.

[eaLiTy]

~
Look at those project with anonymous developer, most of them turned into a scam project and this is why this has been a big concern for the investors. You can still be anonymous by using those altcoins, its just that the developers are expose to the public and that could also be part of their marketing strategy.

The number of scam projects this space has encountered in the past several years is more than enough to distrust any projects with an unknown team and people should be wary because they are collecting money in the name of creating a project. So if you are raising money you should be public.

I have seen some are asking why Satoshi was anonymous and still BTCitcoin reached this position, the answer is simple. Satoshi never raised money to create BTCitcoin and the code was everything.

[PrivacyG]

As you probably very well know, most Cryptocurrency investors are not thoroughly researching projects before placing their bets on it.  It turns out there are trends that people are desperately moving after.  KYC'd teams are now the trend.  They think projects with KYC'd teams are automatically worth investing into since they are 'serious'.  Truth is, KYC does nothing much other than creating a false image of sincerity.

The days when unknown developers are creating a coin are over because nowadays it is not about the lines of code but about how well the Whitepaper lies to you and what breed of dog your Token has been named after.  A decade ago, it was mostly developers who got into Bitcoin and they were impressed by the lines of code and ideas they have seen.  Now, it is the figures that impress the future investors.  500 percent profit in a week?  Sure, let me just pour the savings of a life time into it.  This is today's mind set.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[tvplus006]

...Furthermore, almost every ICOs have a developer team section, displaying a picture and social medias of each of them. And once more, it doesn't prevent some of these projects stopping at the middle of the development and most of them being useless and unprofitable after the launchment...

There are also such cases, in order to make the project legal, a fake team with fake profiles on social networks is published. Therefore, the presence of a team in the project does not guarantee its legality and in such cases it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive research of the project in order not to become a victim of scam.

[dwminer1]

The crypto industry has changed a lot since Bitcoin's inception and is constantly evolving. Nowadays, if the creators of a project want to remain anonymous, for me that is a big red flag and 99% of that cases are scam. In this case, I'm probably a bit of a hypocrite, because I don't like KYC myself and avoid KYC whenever I can, but I think that the creators of projects should be known and be responsible for their works.