Hi All,
This is not about scam projects. This is about the projects which fail to raise enough funds due to what so ever reasons. When bounty hunters work for weeks and at the last moment project announces that they can no longer run it due to insufficient funds raised, its nothing but a waste of time and energy for us.
In my opinion, should project teams have enough fundings before they look for investors? What is called MVP is very important for the users to check for before investing.
MVP will ensure that even if funds are not raised as expected, it can be delayed but not dead.
From your point of view, what other points are there which projects and investors both look for?
Your post is kind of self contradictory.
The whole point of an ICO is to raise funding for development. There is no surebet on whether or not an ICO can raise enough funds for their development, and if they had funding to begin with then theoretically, they would never have to go public with their tokens anyhow.
But yes, I agree with the bounty statement. I think that teams have the obligation to compensate the bounty hunters fairly, even if their projects may fail.