How to recognize scam ICO?

Scam is a hoax. To understand that the scam phenomenon is not new, you just need to add a point to it and http://scam.com - will give out hundreds of results on the topic. And this is not surprising: people tend to make mistakes, which means that there will always be those who turn their mistakes into business. And here's more about this.

Scam is fraud: again, a simple query "scam + history" will present a large list of services of various kinds that somehow decided to play on trust, stupidity or carelessness of users. Spheres will be very different: from energy to the banking sector. As for ICO, despite its youth, it exists in 2013, there are plenty of skylights in it.

It's very difficult to evaluate technology if you are not an expert.

True, one day I was helped by a banal search for the source, which coincided with the script of another project by almost 100%. It's good that the Internet is created exactly as a collective mind: anyone can ask a question on a profile forum, a question site or a chat room (in telegrams, say, such now).
Feedback from scammers and fraudsters is completely different. Scammers do not answer at all or answer extremely blurry on direct questions. Exceptions are, of course, but this is a different level of training.

Concept.

If in technology we evaluate the code, the possibility of selling the product from the point of view of production, then here is the competitive market and the economic utility of the service as a whole. Unfortunately, even normal projects do not analyze the first and second components (which eventually results in the collapse of many services). But the benches can be distinguished by too iridescent descriptions or, conversely, confusing definitions, of which little remains clear after reading.
In this regard, I liked the approach of the Kickico team, which tries to unify the study of projects BEFORE their launch, and not after.

Token.

Finally, after SEC & MAS, people began to understand that it is not clear what to release, it is not clear to anyone - not just strange, but also dangerous. As a result, if we see that the tokens are created using the system "Buy cheaper - sell more expensive" and they do not need anything else behind them: bonuses, shareholdings, buybacks and so on, this is another reason to think about feasibility studies (feasibility study ) And its adequacy.

In many spheres (business organization, development of anti-fraud solutions, ICO marketing, etc.)

I have often heard of some secret techniques and techniques. But there are very few of them,

and the very approach that there is some insight leads us to a real concealment of information, which in turn allows us to manipulate the market on the one hand, and on the other leads to a situation where we hope for something that is not . With the ICO assessment, everything is exactly the same.
It is necessary to understand that ICO is a beginner, which means a high-risk business. Especially in the framework of the latest statements of SEC & MAS.

In order to properly invest in ICO or a start-up on the blockroom as a whole, in my opinion, it is necessary to adopt three simple rules:

• Service for you personally should be understandable in the principles of work and close to the goals;
• The speculative component should not be the only one (in this respect, the Mavro is just an example of the opposite);
• And, at last, it is safe to invest only those incomes that go beyond your personal expenses, no matter what the specific
  amount is being discussed.

In general, this is not all, but fundamentally - yes. Further it is necessary to vary the received principles within the framework of concrete estimations and to develop own system of estimations which can be:

• By the criterion of perception: positive or negative;
• Per level of perception: difficult or simple;
  By ball scale:
  Ten-point - one of the simplest and most understandable: anything below zero is closer to the bench; All that is higher is farther from the bench;
  Stopallnaya. If there are one hundred or more elements in your personal rating set: the approach is good for semi-automatic evaluation;
  You can also use a mixed system: say negative factors to assign up to 10 points in the negative, and positive, respectively, in a plus. Each project is initially taken for 100% and then we begin the analysis: if the final score is below 33-66%, then this is a suspicion of a scam, 66-75% is the norm, then there are good and excellent projects.
• By other criteria, for example, using the system of valuing securities or by applying an emotional coloring approach (negative, neutral-negative, neutral, neutral-positive, positive).
  Thus, the scam detection system can be built, but the only thing that remains always behind the brackets is our common greed: if it is peculiar to you in critical moments, then my personal position is simple: "ICO is not for you."