Quote from: Rustamm on April 21, 2019, 03:08:31 AM

Quote from: Vektrum on April 21, 2019, 02:55:34 AM

Quote from: dubynin.ilya on April 20, 2019, 10:35:37 AM

Quote from: kiryamikronov on April 19, 2019, 05:29:06 PM

Quote from: Vektrum on April 18, 2019, 01:06:30 AM

In the period from April 4 to July 26, the AMANPURI team conducts its bounty campaigns ICO and already at the initial stage of ICO all members of the bounty are offered on the amanpuri -tsp website. com KYC pass check and your data, including photographs of your passport, to present in the personal account of the investor.
KYC checks should be conducted to prevent the laundering of dirty money and combat the financing of terrorism. Logically, only investors should be subject to such verification, since participants in ICO bounty campaigns are not investors.
Can the AMANPURI team clarify the regulatory act of which state or states require the ICO team to conduct a KYC check from participants in the ICO bounty campaigns, where and how long will the collected confidential information be kept?
At this forum, there has long been a dispute over the legality of the collection of confidential information from participants in the ICO bounty campaigns and yet no team has provided such information. Although some teams agree that participants in ICO bounty campaigns are not investors and therefore should not be tested by KYC.

I'm also glad to hear that the answer team is very important information and just so nobody wants to give if there is no certainty that our data will remain confidential

nevertheless it is very interesting to me that the development team will answer, now I understand the question remains open

ICO teams prefer not to answer this question. In principle, they themselves do not know the answer to this question and carry out KYC checks against bounty hunters just because others do it. Only in one case, the ICO team agreed that bounty hunters would not be investors in ICO projects, so they should not be tested by KYC.

That is why the activity of ICO should be subject to state regulation. Then the rights and obligations of all participants will be clearly defined, and at the same time we will get rid of fraudulent projects, and the activities of the ICO will again become formerly popular.

I totally agree with you. ICO and IPO must have government regulation but it needs to be decentralized.