IEO SCAMS! Special Episode of the CryptoLaw Podcast IEO: ICO 2.0 or Scam? feat. On Yavin of Cointelligence - includes discussion of rumors surrounding possible IEO Scams and How to Get Help if you Believe That You Have Been Scammed.

http://www.cryptolawpodcast.com/episodes/ieo-scam/

‪In just the past few days we have seen a large uptick in traffic for our review of PinkDate, a project we refer to as  “The Silk Road for Hookers.” And the only reason we call it that is because that’s exactly how one of its founders described PinkDate to us. If that‘s not enough to make your hair stand on end and run as far away from this project as possible, hopefully our ICO Review of PinkDate will:

https://www.tokenicide.com/review/pinkdate/

Thank you for the supportive words and we are very familiar with bounty programs. As a general rule we discourage projects from using them because they create too much potential liability from a legal and regulatory standpoint, e.g., securities and as you mention fraud. We'll have to do some more research on the specific problems you mention and if you have any more info you can always submit it anonymously to https://www.tokenicide.com/anonymous-tip-form/

Yesterday we posted a revised review of the EtherInc blockchain project which eventually got the attention of a business associate of one of the top ICObench "experts" who, according to his LinkedIn feed, was one of the project's advisors. He posted a comment to our review threatening us with legal action. We think it demonstrates the lengths to which people affiliated with ICObench will go to silence critics. You can read the comment and our response here:

https://www.tokenicide.com/review/ico-update-etherinc/

And last month, another ICObench expert doxed one of our contributors when he read our expose of ICObench (https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/). Here is a screenshot of the expert's Twitter post doxing our contributor:

https://www.tokenicide.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/img_1078-1.jpg

We are not affected by these sorts of attacks because we expect them, and since one of us is an attorney threats of legal action don't bother us either. But they can be very damaging to the reputations and careers of others who are not similarly situated, and we think it's very disturbing that these "experts" are willing to sink so low to scare people who criticize them. To us it just confirms the complete lack of any ethics or professionalism over at ICObench.

If you have witnessed any fraud or corruption by ICObench experts or anywhere else in the ICO support service industry, you can submit the information anonymously on a special form we set up here:

https://www.tokenicide.com/anonymous-tip-form/

Thank you for reading.

Thank you for this research. We've also been extremely critical of them, citing obvious conflicts of interest and unrealistic ratings given in exchange for advisory board positions. Our expose is called "ICObench Warmer," available here: https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/.

What's most disturbing (or hilarious depending on how you look at it) is how desperate they have become. Last month one of their experts doxed a contributor to our site and another one threatened a lawsuit earlier today, which you can see in the comments to this post: https://www.tokenicide.com/review/ico-update-etherinc/.

No. Not at all. We've been extremely critical of them, citing obvious conflicts of interest and unrealistic ratings given in exchange for money or advisory board positions. There are many independent journalists and bloggers that have written about them as well. Our expose is called "ICObench Warmer," available here: https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/.

Lately they've become even less professional and more desperate. One of their experts doxed a contributor to our site and another one threatened a lawsuit, which you can see in the comments to this post: https://www.tokenicide.com/review/ico-update-etherinc/.

Supposedly they used to be more reliable but in the past few months the site is effectively useless.

I used to think that blockchain technology could assist with fighting corruption. Not anymore. In theory I guess it could. Whether anyone actually uses it effectively to do that is another question.  For a community that constantly talks about transparency, accountability, and self-regulation, the crypto ecosystem (and especially ICOs) are incredibly corrupt. If they aren’t willing to self-regulate, who is?

https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/fall-guy-ico-industry/

Does ICObench know about the fact that you’re selling expert reviews on their site? Do they condone it?

Totally serious questions here...

https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/fall-guy-ico-industry/

That would have been well done but we think it's just for the pre-sale. The total hard cap is closer to $50 million, which is ridiculous in our opinion. However, if we're wrong we would love to be corrected.

https://www.tokenicide.com/review/ravn/

PinkDate is the first ICO to receive our lowest possible rating:

0 –  Epic and total failure

If there was a lower rating we would have given that instead.

You can read the full review here: https://www.tokenicide.com/review/pinkdate/

Tokenicide is an ICO news & review site that refuses to prostitute itself. Our mission is to provide readers with ICO reviews that are funny, honest af and heavily laden with superfluous profanity (because that’s how we do).

We are seeking writers willing to give totally honest, no BS reviews of upcoming ICOs. Here is an example of one we did a few days ago: https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/launch-scam-ico/

If you think most ICO review sites are a joke and want to help expose them while also providing entertaining and informative articles to help readers protect themselves and learn more about the technology, just visit the link above and use the Contact Us form.

Thanks!

It might be possible to take your self-promo more seriously if you kicked ICObench off the list. They may not have been quite so bad when you first posted this but they're complete whores at this point. It's a total insider operation - near-perfect reviews can be traded for advisory board seats. Completely worthless. E.g., https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/

It may come as a bit of a shock, but we’ve discovered the #1 reason why most scam ICOs fail:

Somebody realized it was a scam before the founders made off with the loot

 

The takeaway from this unexpected conclusion is that if you want your scam ICO to be successful, make sure it doesn't look like a scam.

Unless of course you are the NASO ICO, which we think is the dumbest ICO ever.

Let us know what you think and if you've seen any worse...

https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/launch-scam-ico/

The tl;dr; version of the review of the PITCH ICO is as follows:

If Your 'Shark Tank' ICO Needs an Advisor, You Can't Do Much Better Than Kevin Fucking Harrington


https://www.tokenicide.com/review/pitch/

The main reason ICO scams fail is because somebody realizes it's a scam before the founders have an opportunity to make off with the loot.

Ergo, if you want to pull a successful scam, you should take steps to make your ICO not look like a scam.

But the good folks behind the "NASO" ICO apparently disagree, since it is the most blatantly obvious (and tragically pathetic) attempt at a scam we have ever seen.

Whatever you do, please don't invest in it, but it's still worth checking out for a laugh. 

https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/launch-scam-ico/

It seems like a lot of the attention in the (mainstream and crypto-focused) media is spent covering scams that either involve:

1. Clear criminal intent to defraud ICO participants;
2. Large sums of money; or
3. Celebrities.

We think equally important (and collectively likely to result in much greater losses overall to token holders) are projects where the only honest answer to the question “Why blockchain?” is “Because that’s the only way we can raise f*cktons of money via an ICO.”

Should more attention be paid to these "lesser scams" which couldn't disrupt their way out of a paper bag but manage to siphon off resources from projects that might actually be able to do something useful?

http://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/wham-bam-exit-scam/

Everything you've said here is 100% accurate and we believe the crap that's being pulled by "experts" on sites like ICObench is far worse than this example suggests.

And since we don't mind being a wall of shame we have posted all the deets here:

http://www.tokenicide.com/review/einc/

and here:

http://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/

At this point we would call into question the quality of any ICO that has its advisory board packed with more than just one or two top-rated "experts" from ICObench.

And ICObench is only one of many sites playing this game. The only reason we've focused on them is because (1) they happen to be the most heavily trafficked ICO rating site; (2) what they're doing is so blatantly obvious that it was easy to spot; and (3) we just started working on this project about a week ago so we haven't had time to call out any of the other bad actors. But we're working on it. And we welcome any suggestions as to other sites/advisors/ICOs that need public shaming.