Altcoins Talks - Cryptocurrency Forum
Crypto Discussion Forum => Cryptocurrency discussions => Topic started by: bobby on March 22, 2018, 03:23:59 PM
-
Hi everyone! I'm new on here and hope you'll forgive possible beginners mistakes. I was was wondering what you think about this one: I always have my eyes on some new projects, platforms, coins, ICOs etc. and browse through quite a lot of different websites on my research. How do you decide whether a coin is trustworthy/worth investing in? Is the whitepaper enough? Or do you have recommendations for review websites for new ICOs? Thanks so much for your help.
-
I think you can judge a coin from its white paper and road map if you like it than invest otherwise let it go.
-
I think you can judge a coin from its white paper and road map if you like it than invest otherwise let it go.
Okay great thanks! You also try to do research on independent platforms? Or base it on the coin's own sites only?
-
Here's some websites worth checking out for reviews and analysis.
https://icobench.com/
https://foundico.com/
https://icovoting.com/
Any reviews should always be taken with a pinch of salt though. Very often the reviewers are being rewarded in some way for publicising the project. Make sure you do your own independent research and decide whether any project is worth investing in. Reading the whitepaper is definitely an essential part of the process. Checking through their website and social media channels will give you more of an insight as well.
-
For me, the whitepaper is just a paper which tells their business idea. It was written and can be changed. Look out for the team members, are they willing to reveal their true identity or are the images they claim to be them really represents them?
Are there some well-known personalities involved? Look out for advisers, do they really represent them or just added them there.
For instance, if a project adds Vitalik as an adviser, don't jump into conclusion and invest with them. Look on his twitter walls, he will definitely tweet about them.
-
For me, the whitepaper is just a paper which tells their business idea. It was written and can be changed. Look out for the team members, are they willing to reveal their true identity or are the images they claim to be them really represents them?
Are there some well-known personalities involved? Look out for advisers, do they really represent them or just added them there.
For instance, if a project adds Vitalik as an adviser, don't jump into conclusion and invest with them. Look on his twitter walls, he will definitely tweet about them.
Very helpful, thanks so much! I'll keep my eyes open for these points and keep you posted on my progress with checking interesting projects! Happy to hear some exciting new ones from you too of course! :)
-
On my opinion yes! If you are serious to your project you must pay attention to everything in it. Including website.
-
there are lots of sites in online who judge ico for u
so u dont have to spend more time for judging for urself
u can search online to check ur ico rating
-
I've been having my eyes on this Austrian start-up Cultural Places and their ICO for the cultural coin recently because I'm really interested in what they try to do. Following your advice, I've been looking out for more infos and find out about the team. I realised that they seem to present all team members on their websites + links to linkedin which seems very trustworthy to me. Is it normal to do that? Or is it not what you would expect?
Whitepaper and website look excellent and very professional though - so far so interesting. Has anyone ever heard of them? Anything else I should look out for? :) Thanks guys!
-
To me the whitepaper is not the highlight of the project. It can take anything. I first check if the team are real persons with some experience appropriate for the project. Then I check if there is some product already in existence. And lastly I have to ask mysefl if this project really needs to be on blockchain and is not just a "tokenization for its own sake" thing. And then I also check reviews and what others may think. If all this turns out OK, I might invest. So far so good:)
-
To me the whitepaper is not the highlight of the project. It can take anything. I first check if the team are real persons with some experience appropriate for the project. Then I check if there is some product already in existence. And lastly I have to ask mysefl if this project really needs to be on blockchain and is not just a "tokenization for its own sake" thing. And then I also check reviews and what others may think. If all this turns out OK, I might invest. So far so good:)
Sounds like a good way of doing it, thanks for that! Looks like I'm on the right way with cultural places. Maybe worth investing as long as they have the token bonus. 8)
-
To me the whitepaper is not the highlight of the project. It can take anything. I first check if the team are real persons with some experience appropriate for the project. Then I check if there is some product already in existence. And lastly I have to ask mysefl if this project really needs to be on blockchain and is not just a "tokenization for its own sake" thing. And then I also check reviews and what others may think. If all this turns out OK, I might invest. So far so good:)
Sounds like a good way of doing it, thanks for that! Looks like I'm on the right way with cultural places. Maybe worth investing as long as they have the token bonus. 8)
Indeed he has a very good technique.
-
The firstimpression of a website can have a huge impact, i would be concerned for negative rather then positive. Definitely any project to be taken seriously needs a proper webpage.
-
The firstimpression of a website can have a huge impact, i would be concerned for negative rather then positive. Definitely any project to be taken seriously needs a proper webpage.
I totally agree. I mean - I have read about some amazing projects and then went on their website and found it incredibly uninspiring and indeed not quite up to the standard I would expect. How the hell can you be trying to sell computer-based product without managing to install a proper website. Waste of time if you ask me. :-\
-
Here's some websites worth checking out for reviews and analysis.
https://icobench.com/
https://foundico.com/
https://icovoting.com/
Any reviews should always be taken with a pinch of salt though. Very often the reviewers are being rewarded in some way for publicising the project. Make sure you do your own independent research and decide whether any project is worth investing in. Reading the whitepaper is definitely an essential part of the process. Checking through their website and social media channels will give you more of an insight as well.
Very useful links for checking ICOs, thanks! Found the cultural coin on there too, decent rating :) https://icobench.com/ico/cultural-places/ratings#ratings ! Who do you trust if the ratings on these sites differ massively? Trust your instinct? :D
-
Hi everyone! I'm new on here and hope you'll forgive possible beginners mistakes. I was was wondering what you think about this one: I always have my eyes on some new projects, platforms, coins, ICOs etc. and browse through quite a lot of different websites on my research. How do you decide whether a coin is trustworthy/worth investing in? Is the whitepaper enough? Or do you have recommendations for review websites for new ICOs? Thanks so much for your help.
Before investing should read wp and see the website, social media and team that handle the project. do not forget to take a look at the ICO review website.
-
Hi everyone! I'm new on here and hope you'll forgive possible beginners mistakes. I was was wondering what you think about this one: I always have my eyes on some new projects, platforms, coins, ICOs etc. and browse through quite a lot of different websites on my research. How do you decide whether a coin is trustworthy/worth investing in? Is the whitepaper enough? Or do you have recommendations for review websites for new ICOs? Thanks so much for your help.
Before investing should read wp and see the website, social media and team that handle the project. do not forget to take a look at the ICO review website.
Thanks for your help! That's definitely what I have done with this project. :) Also great to have got some suggestions for review websites!
-
Regarding the question how to judge different reviewing sites or more correctly different review outcomes on different sites...this may be a bit contra-logical since we build such sites to help with quick judgements in the first place but if you want to understand such a site, you should dive a bit into the descriptions, how those reviews or - most of the time - the comparable numbers added to each project (stuff like Marketing: 7/10 points or Team: 8/10 points ) are created. Sometimes the makers of the site make some kind of equation which they apply with respect to all available information, sometimes its more of a group-thinking thing and its just the average result from all global reviews of its members. If you find out how a site does create its numbers, you can also decide yourself, if you think their process is helpful to the kind of decision you wish to make. ;-)
Icobench for example also works with average numbers but since you are able to read every single review which participated to reach this outcome, you can judge the outcome in a transparent way and just disregard singular opinions which - in your eyes - are, for example, biased or concentrating on faults which you don't think are that important.
-
The website has influence because people base on that to make decisions
-
Regarding the question how to judge different reviewing sites or more correctly different review outcomes on different sites...this may be a bit contra-logical since we build such sites to help with quick judgements in the first place but if you want to understand such a site, you should dive a bit into the descriptions, how those reviews or - most of the time - the comparable numbers added to each project (stuff like Marketing: 7/10 points or Team: 8/10 points ) are created. Sometimes the makers of the site make some kind of equation which they apply with respect to all available information, sometimes its more of a group-thinking thing and its just the average result from all global reviews of its members. If you find out how a site does create its numbers, you can also decide yourself, if you think their process is helpful to the kind of decision you wish to make. ;-)
Icobench for example also works with average numbers but since you are able to read every single review which participated to reach this outcome, you can judge the outcome in a transparent way and just disregard singular opinions which - in your eyes - are, for example, biased or concentrating on faults which you don't think are that important.
Absolutely brilliantly put! Thanks!! So basically the best way of going about doing this is to check out the different review sites, make sure I know what the review is based on and then decide what aspects are the most important to me. Cultural coin is actually pretty helpful in that way since they post all the sites they are listed on on their own website - makes my research easier. Generally speaking though these sites are sooo useful! There are so many projects out there and I would have a hard time judging all by myself. Do you guys also ask about the projects in forums or do you only trust your own research?
-
Its really tough, as some of you in crypto know Antshares before NEO had one of the WORST white papers I've ever seen. It was full of poor English grammar and misspelled words which really scared me off at first. I think you'll have to work out a combination of judging product, website, whitepaper, etc on some sort of grading scale where everything matters but one specific thing can't be a pass or fail..or you might miss out on a 30000% gain like NEO. Food for thought.
-
Yes and no I would say.
Of course you will be able to judge when looking to website if this coin is well funded or just anew coin with no money to invest. I have seen a lot of projects in early stages with bad pages but they upgraded it very soon. So if you see a shitty page and the team does nothing with it for a very long time you can assume that there is no future for this project.
-
Hi everyone! I'm new on here and hope you'll forgive possible beginners mistakes. I was was wondering what you think about this one: I always have my eyes on some new projects, platforms, coins, ICOs etc. and browse through quite a lot of different websites on my research. How do you decide whether a coin is trustworthy/worth investing in? Is the whitepaper enough? Or do you have recommendations for review websites for new ICOs? Thanks so much for your help.
Websites can give a clue on the originality of the project especially when you compare their social media platforms with the websites - check out for information consistencies on these platforms. But the team can be of great importance. Look out for the credentials of the developer and his team - do they have any past experience?, who is the advisor? etc
-
Regarding the question how to judge different reviewing sites or more correctly different review outcomes on different sites...this may be a bit contra-logical since we build such sites to help with quick judgements in the first place but if you want to understand such a site, you should dive a bit into the descriptions, how those reviews or - most of the time - the comparable numbers added to each project (stuff like Marketing: 7/10 points or Team: 8/10 points ) are created. Sometimes the makers of the site make some kind of equation which they apply with respect to all available information, sometimes its more of a group-thinking thing and its just the average result from all global reviews of its members. If you find out how a site does create its numbers, you can also decide yourself, if you think their process is helpful to the kind of decision you wish to make. ;-)
Icobench for example also works with average numbers but since you are able to read every single review which participated to reach this outcome, you can judge the outcome in a transparent way and just disregard singular opinions which - in your eyes - are, for example, biased or concentrating on faults which you don't think are that important.
Absolutely brilliantly put! Thanks!! So basically the best way of going about doing this is to check out the different review sites, make sure I know what the review is based on and then decide what aspects are the most important to me. Cultural coin is actually pretty helpful in that way since they post all the sites they are listed on on their own website - makes my research easier. Generally speaking though these sites are sooo useful! There are so many projects out there and I would have a hard time judging all by myself. Do you guys also ask about the projects in forums or do you only trust your own research?
My pleasure, glad if you lked my little explanation, i assumed it would be easier like that to understand the concept. ;) Yeah, since the teams behind the currencies got an interest of their own to include all mainstream review sites...and maybe also a few "friendly" non-mainstream ones, any interested person usually does not need to look for a long time to find the necessary information. If this ticketing with cryptocurrency project you are interested in also promotes those sites, i guess they are pretty happy with the results ...or at least the attention. ^^
Well, if i stumble over a new project i do the typical thing - finding out if it is legit by clicking through their homepage. If something is fishy, i research it some more and then i check review sites and double-check their findings with my own...that way i am always secure. ;)
-
Websites can give a clue on the originality of the project especially when you compare their social media platforms with the websites - check out for information consistencies on these platforms. But the team can be of great importance. Look out for the credentials of the developer and his team - do they have any past experience?, who is the advisor? etc
Thanks for this, I agree, everything stands and falls with the team. Originality is a great keyword for this I think. I really am a visual person so I am automatically drawn to a website like the cultural places' one.
Its really tough, as some of you in crypto know Antshares before NEO had one of the WORST white papers I've ever seen. It was full of poor English grammar and misspelled words which really scared me off at first. I think you'll have to work out a combination of judging product, website, whitepaper, etc on some sort of grading scale where everything matters but one specific thing can't be a pass or fail..or you might miss out on a 30000% gain like NEO. Food for thought.
Food for thought indeed. I can feel you when you say that grammar and spelling mistakes scared you off, I totally get the same. I just come from an industry where these things are very important but it would be a shame to miss out on great chances just because I am judging all too quickly.
Yes and no I would say.
Of course you will be able to judge when looking to website if this coin is well funded or just anew coin with no money to invest. I have seen a lot of projects in early stages with bad pages but they upgraded it very soon. So if you see a shitty page and the team does nothing with it for a very long time you can assume that there is no future for this project.
Thats a very interesting point I haven't thought of yet. Good to keep an eye on these websites for a bit longer then and not just let a not so impressing website scare me off from the start.
-
My pleasure, glad if you lked my little explanation, i assumed it would be easier like that to understand the concept. ;) Yeah, since the teams behind the currencies got an interest of their own to include all mainstream review sites...and maybe also a few "friendly" non-mainstream ones, any interested person usually does not need to look for a long time to find the necessary information. If this ticketing with cryptocurrency project you are interested in also promotes those sites, i guess they are pretty happy with the results ...or at least the attention. ^^
Well, if i stumble over a new project i do the typical thing - finding out if it is legit by clicking through their homepage. If something is fishy, i research it some more and then i check review sites and double-check their findings with my own...that way i am always secure. ;)
Ahaha, good point about the attention. Attention is never bad for a new project after all and I think the results look pretty decent too. But even if some of the reviews criticise some aspects of the project, I like the transparency which cultural places is showing by putting it onto their website. But yes, good point: Always double check. Thanks!