In recent times there has been several ICOs introducing KYC for bounty hunters, and that has made many Bounty hunters to feel bad.
I would like to share my opinion over this issue. I never see KYC as a bad idea, KYC will actually reduce scammers from using multiple accounts for one bounty and that will also give the genuine hunters the space to earn more in their bounty hunting.
The place I have issues with ICO projects running bounty programs is the idea of some projects that introduce KYC at the end of the bounty program which I really feel it should not be so. It is the same thing as those who used multiple accounts during the bounty because it will still reduce the amount the genuine hunters will earn.
If KYC should be introduced at the end of bounty, the left over coins/token should be distributed among the genuine hunters otherwise I see it as the same scam to the genuine bounty hunters:
Anyway, this is my own view, If you have a contrary view, please share it. I would like to know more also.
I like your opinion and I agree with it. As we know, KYC has a use as a medium for verifying user data. So, if KYC is used to verify the data of the bounty hunters themselves it is not a bad thing. This can also avoid the occurrence of multiple account usage in 1 campaign and there is nothing to be afraid of doing KYC because crypto is no longer anonymous.
But it is true that you say that if this campaign want to do KYC for bounty hunters, they must notify at the outset, not at the end of the campaign. Because if there are many bounty hunters who are not ready for KYC and want to remain anonymous then they will definitely leave it. This clearly becomes unfair because the campaign did not have any commitment from the start.