[bisq-network/proposals] Add information about assets doing ICOs to listing requirement (#57)

[Kee Jefferys]

I know you guys have closed this issue but i really think you need to change your wording here. 

The Act of having an ICO is not what should be preventing a coin from appearing on BISQ, For example Ethereum had a large ICO yet BISQ still supports Ethereum. The fact is that the SEC has stated that a coin can be a security and over time it can transition to not being a security anymore, this was the exact situation for Ethereum.

I assume you want to prevent the BISQ team from attempting to predict what decisions the SEC will make when you list a coin, but if this is case you should also remove all coins who raised any money who have not had an explicit ruling from the SEC on their status as a security. For example 
Spectrecoin or Zcash (Which did not have an ICO but distributes a percentage of the block reward to private investors). You could even go further and make the assumption that dev rewards (Taking a percentage of the block reward) could at somepoint be considered legally risky, how far do you want to go to protect yourself?  

The reality of the situation is that the BISQ team will have to make assessments on coins and how "Decentralized" they are, and you should have a framework for doing so, otherwise you will end up unfairly applying your rules across the board.


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/57#issuecomment-443994902
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20181203/9f1d6ff9/attachment.html>