Investors are complaining and they will still complain because they have refused to learn deep in a project and also learn from their mistakes. Sometimes instead of reading the projects white paper to determine whether it is a short or long term investment plan, they just jump into it and if it turns out different, they end up complaining. Investors should learn rather than complaining.

Why will I trust a project announced by a legendary member alone without doing my own research on such projects, people buy accounts and so far as I don't know the account owner personally, why will trust his or her research by announcing a project, I will rather trust in my own research done trust in a legendary member.

Bounty hunting is not as reliable as it used to be in the years ago and ICO's are also crawling now with the introduction of IEO's but I don't see any of these sides having an influencial effect to end bounty programs, no matter the penny bounty hunters are earning from bounty campaigns, they still will participate which will never make bounty program over.

The most annoying moments ever is such, when a bounty project fails me as both an investor and hunter but in these moments of regret, I've gained much experience on how to conduct my research before jumping into any project either to invest or promote as a hunter.

Proof of authentication
Bitcointalk username: Redemption59
Telegram username: @Quame2
Campaign id: Signature
Telegram UID: 899051155
Hydax UID: 489916377902356224

The ackward moment is after spending tiresome months to complete a bounty, project and bounty managers sit there trying to determine what is good them which goes against hunters, they are always of the view that bounty hunters will dump which will lead the fall of the token or coin price forgetting that only a smaller percentage wa allocated for bounty and so if there is any dump, its either from the team or investors, its high time project managers consider this and stop blaming and denying bounty hunters what is due them.

There are several ico project out there with very good ratings from these ico rating websites and the truth about it all is that these ico website will never mention the specific criteria upon which they rate these ico projects which makes it more evidently clear that some project pay to be rated higher to attract more investors and traders which is a bad character on part of the ico rating website to deceive the mass out there.

Participating in bounty programs or projects is very necessary but the announcer is just a bell to the crypto world which gives hunters and investors the opportunity to ascertain and investigate more into the project before participating in it. A newbie can post a scam project and same way a legendary member since we don't know each of them personally. So personally I trust in my investigation and research and not whether it was announced by a legendary member.

there are more than enough reaons to continue participating in bounty campaigns even though participating in new bounty campaigns don't seem appealing but what if the next bounty campaign to participate in is your breakthrough and its going to be your all time highest paid bounty program. Time changes and the useless or shit tokens you have now can turned out to be something huge. I will still participate or join bounties because I know I will surely meet my breakthrough bounty.

Investors are still complaining and they will still keep complaining until they find a way out there. These investors are much interested in spending their resources and not about getting time to read projects whitepaper to ascertain and make solid decisions as to whether the projects calls for short or long term investment plans. To me, most are lazy.

ICO's are really not dead but in a state of dormancy. ICO's were at their peak even though it was asociated with much scams but the rise of IEO's has now determined the fate of ICO's are ico's are now dormant and most lack even funds to live upto expectation or follow their roadmap. For a fact, ICO's are dormant but not dead.

gone were the days that ICO rating websites were found of doing great and amazing but not this current crypto world where these rating websites receive money before they do their work giving out poor rating values to deceive investors and traders. For me, I will definitely participate in a new project if not listed on any ico rating website.

It is very normal to give out a percentage of bonus to early birds who take upon themselves to take uch a bold step with huge sums of money but the fact about this does not sound well in most ears for giving as much as 40% bonus to early investors who quickly dump upon listing since they have got nothing to lose and project managers turns out to blame hunters innocent hunters. Its indded too much to give out such amount to early investors.

I think this is right as any projects developing team can lure to pay these ico rating websites to promote their projects and attract as much investors as they could and when they gain much from these investors, they decide not to continue with the project again. The introduction of these IEO's will surely help and only with regulation will investors turn back to ico's.

Being impatient when its an issue concerning money is very okay to me because everybody works hard to earn their money but when its related to projects and investors, I think there is nothing good to talk about since these investors are not ready to learn to determine the future of the projects they invest in, they only go for hype and when the project is not doing a expected by them, they start to judge the project. It is time investors sit down and read projects whitepaper, know their roadmap and come to the knowledge of understanding whether the project is a short or long term investment project and make a decision on that rather than following hype and being quick in judging projects.

project managers and their advisory board will keep making this mistake over and over and still not realize its their mistake of giving out 40% discount to investors that mostly leads to dump of their tokens but instead they are always happy to blame bounty hunters for dumping upon listing forgetting the early huge bonus they gave to investors. To me, 40% is too huge and should be reduced drastically.

Being quick in judging ICO's is a serious big mistake that we should all desist from. Though most of the ico projects that came and are still coming day in and day out are scam but the fact that most ico's are scam projects does not mean all ico projects are scam, there are legit ones out there, its up to you and I to make our very own research to fish these legit ones out and promote rather than being quick in judging every ico.

Proof of Authentication post
Bitcointalk username: Redemption59
Bitcointalk profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2290892
campaign: signature campaign

So what if the legendary member account was purchased? People buy forum accounts and therefore trusting a project posted by a legendary member account is one greatest mistake one will ever do. The most important decision is to undergo an individual thorough research on the project at hand and come out with your own conclusions.

This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.