Quote from: btcapparel on May 01, 2018, 07:58:12 PM

Quote from: fulcare on May 01, 2018, 07:47:26 PM

Quote from: btcapparel on May 01, 2018, 06:17:48 AM

Quote from: fulcare on April 30, 2018, 11:09:36 PM

Quote from: haufranco on April 17, 2018, 05:00:34 PM

Quote from: fulcare on April 17, 2018, 02:24:16 PM

Quote from: btcapparel on April 09, 2018, 12:00:40 PM

Quote from: fulcare on April 09, 2018, 11:45:46 AM

Quote from: btcapparel on April 05, 2018, 07:36:44 AM

Quote from: aryan7980 on April 05, 2018, 07:16:59 AM

Quote from: apmapm12 on April 05, 2018, 07:08:22 AM

Quote from: biplobmbhr on April 05, 2018, 06:55:37 AM

Quote from: fulcare on April 04, 2018, 03:53:43 PM

I didn't know that and it is also impossible to verify whether they are independent or not. We all know how the three big ratings agencies did their job right before the financial crisis Wink

They claimed to be independent, but obviously they weren't.

The one thing I really don't like and don't understand in ICObench is rating. There are several of so-called "experts" who have no idea about the tech behind blockchain and ICO. So they review projects and making grades for each project, but some of this experts are obviously don't know what these projects are about.

Yeah, this rating system is ridiculous, some great projects has 3.5-3.8 rankings

As for my opinion, every "expert" should be forced to describe his grades and leave a comment, so people can research and follow opinions not just the numbers.

I do agree with you guys, there should be a kind of explanation or the way to discuss ay least, but both of those experts haven't answered on LinkedIn.
But don't you worry, ICObench rating is one of preliminary ratings and having 5.0 is much more suspicious than say 3.8 or 4.3 as it's a result of some work done.
The final mark comes from the market anyway )

They have also been bad with their ratings at times when high quality of the project was very obvious. In that case they probably did an independent rating. Question remains whether they take money from some projects or not but I doubt that we will ever find out.

We won't unless someone enrolled an independent expert tells the world

Having a whistleblower would be great. An enrolled expert might not have the info we are looking for though. Payments could still be made in the background without some of the experts even knowing.

I always say- trust none other than yourself. Why not invest some time in doing the research yourself? Personally I don't trust anyone else with my money.

The minority of investors in crypto does the due diligence thoroughly. The large majority only listens to some crazy Youtube video producer.

Even YouTube has become less reasonable.
Each blogger now has a number or dissappointed who trusted, but it did't work out.
And of course, an incredible number or scammers/spammers who ping us on Telegram every minute.

It's all about your own research guys, the market today has a lot of cases to be compared.

Less reasonable is a negative exaggeration. It is a joke what most Youtubers do and they simply get paid to talk positively about scams.

Well some of them are taking your promo video and use it as about the half of their "review" )

Lol man that's even worse. But you know it's the audience that decides about their rise and fall. If they want to watch copied content, then there is a right for those youtubers to exist.