When i search i found ICO projects with very good rating, this rating posted buy ICO rating websites, how this rating works, websites did not mention about the factors use to rate this projects.
Paying attention to ICO rating sites can be misleading. At a point, I thought people were no more following ICO listing sites and that they do not trust then again. Once they get paid, so many factors are left out. So get more they are paid, the higher the rating.
Why don't we just instead rate these projects ourselves? I think it would be ideal if assess them ourselves in order to get to know the project's fundamentals first hand and not just rely on some scrappy rating sites that has been conning us ever since. I've list some criteria in my previous post in order to guide us on this process as quoted below:
Here are some of my questions which could serve as a checklist in determining whether an ICO is right for investment or not or whether its a scam or not?:
1. Does it have a sound business plan and original and not a copy paste idea?
2. Does it already have an MVP?
3. Does it have a Github repository already?
4. Do the development team are capable in delivering the product?
5. Does the team's identities verifiable or have been verified?
6. Does it have a realistic roadmap?
7. Does the team give utmost importance to their promises and perform deliverables?
8. Does the project exercise more transparency on project related matters?
9. Does the project's have excellent and justifiable tokenomics?
10. Does the project have positive peer reviews among trustworthy members of the community?
Link:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5144508.msg51103208#msg51103208