4 ms·
> A public ICO blasting across the internet when there is no product, no plan, and no real engineering already done is nothing but a cash grab, and I am not at
by pera 9y ago
> A public ICO blasting across the internet when there is no product, no plan, and no real engineering already done is nothing but a cash grab, and I am not at all surprised that they are embroiled in lawsuits.
Is this really a property of ICOs? the behavior you describe may be very common nowadays, but from what I understand there is nothing intrinsic in this kind of funding model to be necessarily like that. Maybe after a crash the market will get a bit more mature and start using public ICOs for real stuff, and I think that could evolve into something really interesting :)
- barkingcat 9y agoIt's not about the method (ICO), it's about the people and teams behind the ico's being 1) amateurs with no clue 2) very prepared scammers who have really nice fancy websites but no intention to at all to followup or honour the sale and 3) well meaning but totally immature ideas and teams who are doing a cash grab. This case sounds like #3 - where they have an idea, but immature company structure, poor legal structure, and no governance that is supposed to bind a team together - in this case they are fighting about the money ... As always - in the end it's all people. Public ICO is a tool, and it's really NOT the tool to use if you want to find a real base of support and well-intentioned stakeholders (who won't turn around and sue you the moment the ico completes :)
- literallycancer 9y agoYou can't stop a person from buying some minimal amount (the lawsuits claim damages of 1BTC, IIRC) just to sue you later. One hostile contributor doesn't tell you anything about the intentions of the rest.