Quote from: smooth on March 29, 2016, 08:05:56 PM

Quote from: cryptohunter on March 29, 2016, 07:37:58 PM

All ico should post usernames of investors really.

Usernames? LOL. no. ICOs as they are currently understood are just unsalvageable in terms of non-transparency and susceptibility to abuse. All you accomplish with such easily-abused measures is to put a shinier veneer of legitimacy on them.

You could be right. I was just thinking that it would mean creating a lot of puppets and making them look convincing too.

I know I would 100% prefer POW as a distributional method. However, it seems nothing will ever stop ICO's.
The devs always claim they need funding for their ideas which they say they can not get immediately with pow.
Some people will not buy or rent hash and they will always have a crack at an ICO.

If it was the norm for ICO to publish usernames and do 50% or 75% POW then all other ICO that did not do this would immediately ring alarm bells.
There needs to be a away to please enough people for them to get behind it and support it.
The fair release protocol that many POW devs stuck to during wave 2 was actually quite good.
Miners all saw the rules were there to ensure everyone got a equal chance and actually united to demand devs released in that way.

Would be a great to see things swing back to POW although every big release of late has been ICO of some kind.