Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 11:39:36 AM

In most bounty threads it is stated that the bounty rules can change at any time.

That's true but exactly this statement is used for them to "justify" their KYC-scam. They are adding that to their rules while they already know that they will change it after the bounty to save expenses.

In that case it's very clear because they said that all tokens of users who won't pass KYC will be used for advertising campaigns in the future. The reasons for shitcoin issuers to make a KYC scam is:
- get more participants
- scam them later to save parts of the bounty allocation
- (and maybe to get personal data to sell them for making more money if the shitcoin project is a scam)

Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 11:39:36 AM

Moreover, while in some cases it is a shady KYC scam as you say, it also can happen that they are not allowed to do the payout by their compliance team. This has happened before and is a real possibility.

That can happen, of course. Like I said in my OP I understand it that things can change and they are not allowed to issue their tokens to holders without KYC. But if that's the case they have to keep the promise to pay their participants without KYC. They can pay easily in ETH or in BTC if they can't pay in their tokens.
I asked that in their Telegram and they have refused it to pay them otherwise. That shows how their real intention was: saving costs, not regulatory reasons.

KYC scams are always shady because it's a tactic that we can see quite often nowadays. Important is to have a proof that:

- KYC was not required while the bounty was running
- KYC is required after bounty
- The team refuses also payments in BTC or ETH as compensation

=> there's a clear intention to scam and users dealing with that people are at high risk to lose their payouts they have to receive.

Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 11:39:36 AM

Best case would be that all bounties require KYC. No disappointment possible this way.

KYC for bounty is at least useless but in most cases also dangerous.

Why dangerous?
We all know that around 95% of all shitcoin ICOs are scam. And if users are forced to give them their personal data for a few useless shitcoins the possibility to get scammed is very high. I can imagine that there are only Shitcoin ICOs, they don't plan to collect funds. They plan to collect personal data from bounty participants. And enforcing KYC afterwards while denying greedy shitcoin hunters to give them their tokens will lead them to do KYC. Shitcoin hunters are greedy and shitcoin scammers know that.

Besides from that, personal data will rise in value because the real scammers will purchase them on the black market to pass it on exchanges for real money laundering. KYC sounds effective? It isn't, it's quite the opposite and further, it's a risk for legit users.

Why useless?
It's useless because it's another question if KYCs for bounty hunters even make sense. KYC is supposed to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Is it possible to launder money via bounty? - no
Are bounty participants terrorists - I would say no although their comments are sometimes a bit strange. Wink

In addition, the amount of money generated in bounties is so tiny, bounties for terrorists would be a good measure to prevent them from collecting money at least halfways effectively. Wink

The solution is quite simple:
The team has to announce the rules clearly before they start. Or they should pay directly in BTC instead of their useless shitcoins but that would cost them "real" crypto.

But of course, if they want to save cost and pull a KYC-scam / collect personal data, the strategy of TerraGreen is the way to go.

I know, nobody is forced to participate in shitcoin bouties. But we have to step in here where cheaters, scammers or other shady people try to damage other users, take advantage from it and fill their own pockets. Scammers should know that they can't do their shit without getting trouble for it.

Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 11:39:36 AM

While I don't like it, it it not enough for me to support any scam accusation against them. Only solid proof of when that information was brought to the BM attention, or the proof that there is no such thing as the audit mentioned would make me flag/tag them.

I don't know how it should be more obvious that they are refusing payments even in other cryptocurrencies, not their tokens.

Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 11:39:36 AM

Quote from: 1miau on July 09, 2019, 05:14:18 PM

Ive not flagged them yet but I hope that a participant will bring up a scammer flag for violating a written contract because I cant do that, Im not a participant in their bounty.

You don't need to be the victim of the violation to create the flag.

Quote

XXXXX violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. XXXXX did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around date. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.

Source?
As far as I know I have to be affected for flags 2 and 3. Only a Newbie flag is also allowed when I'm not affected.

Quote from: asche on July 10, 2019, 01:38:43 PM

Quote from: JeromeTash on July 10, 2019, 11:56:31 AM

They deserve a scam tag and flag(i will support the flag in any way)

Funny of you to say since you didn't make any of those.

I guess he's not affected, so he can't create a flag 2 or 3.

Quote from: rosezionjohn on July 10, 2019, 11:50:20 AM

Bounties like terragreen are hiding behind their "the has the right to change the rule as they see fit" policy. They don't disclose the KYC requirement at the beginning because many are not willing to disclose their personal info just to receive bounty rewards worth a few dollars.

Exactly that, they are using it as a strategy. Cheesy

Quote from: rosezionjohn on July 10, 2019, 11:50:20 AM

EDIT:
It appears hunters have the option to sell their bounty stakes for ETH on an exchange. Those who bought those stakes will have to undergo KYC also before they can convert the stakes into tokens.

I don't know it exactly, I would guess that's only possible if you receive the bounty stakes in your wallet. And for doing so, you need to pass KYC. I can ask a participant if you want, I had a few PMs but he's afraid to create a flagg because he fears that the team will disqualify him.

Quote from: JeromeTash on July 10, 2019, 11:56:31 AM

Most people don't love to disclose their IDs over tokens and so when they see a campaign requiring KYC, they avoid it.

100% agreed here. There are still ( Tongue

) some people protecting their privacy (which is a valuable good) and if I join a bounty without KYC I have to be paid without KYC and not being blackmailed to send my personal documents to receive a bunch of lousy shitcoins. KYC for shitcoin bounties is encouraging scam and identity theft.