Quote from: hazenyc on May 06, 2018, 07:42:08 PM

Quote from: akramali on May 03, 2018, 04:54:25 PM

Quote from: stas on April 29, 2018, 03:52:57 PM

Quote from: MinerVGA on April 17, 2018, 11:41:56 AM

Quote from: stas on April 17, 2018, 11:34:59 AM

Quote from: alexforneus on April 17, 2018, 11:14:53 AM

Quote from: hazenyc on April 16, 2018, 07:00:05 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.

Definitely questionable and the biggest issue is that you should always assume they bought the coins they are talking positively about to then sell them after you read their ratings. Not very good.

I personally look through some sites with ratings from time to time. But I don't completely focus on them because not all ICOs with high ratings are guaranteed to be successful. I rely more on the team, the telegram, wp and so on

Team is everything as I learned from my experience. If you can meet them face to face that is the best situation as you can see in real time whether they are able to answer questions and provide explanations about their project without any hassle.

Agree
It's always better to communicate with someone personally, in any field. Unfortunately that was not always possible

That is to some degree the disadvantage of global fundraising through ICOs. There is no face to face conversation with the teams anymore and that is why you should at least demand a video conference if you are about to invest a large amount of money.

I think a video about team, about their experience, thoughts, vision of poject would also be nice

Maybe they recognize this and do it. And beforehand collect some questions from the community and answer them.

Sure so something like Q&A or AMA style on a live stream would be the best option to get the most out of a conversation between the community and the team.