Comment on page
Guidelines
Cyrator is a platform for analytical discussion and information sharing in the crypto space. Posts should be made with the intention of contributing to informed and meaningful discussions. Our community guidelines are subject to change as our platform evolves, and we welcome feedback from our analysts on how we can improve our policies and guidelines to better serve the needs of the community.
- 1.Prohibited behavior: Shilling, which is defined as promoting a cryptocurrency project without disclosing conflicts of interest or posting messages with the sole intention of pumping the token, is strictly prohibited on our platform.
- 2.Ethical conduct: Analysts are expected to act ethically and disclose any conflicts of interest that might influence their reviews or analysis. This includes ownership of any tokens or holdings in the projects they review.
- 3.Focus on fundamentals: Our goal is to promote research and analysis based on fundamentals, not just hype or speculation. Analysts are encouraged to provide in-depth, objective, and critical analysis of projects, focusing on their underlying technology, business model, team, and other relevant factors.
- 4.Penalty for violations: Analysts who engage in shilling or other prohibited behavior will have their accounts blocked, and all their pending points and rewards will be revoked. Additionally, they may be subject to further penalties, including but not limited to fines or legal action, as determined by the platform's management.
It is important to maintain impartiality and objectivity when reviewing a blockchain project, and giving financial advice such as advising people to "hodl" or buy tokens is not appropriate in a review.
- 1.Reviews should be rated based on how the project compares to other projects in the market in the specific category you're reviewing. If the project is similar to others in the market, it gets a 3-star rating. 5 Stars should be reserved for projects that are best in class and 1 stars should be reserved for projects that engage in deceptive practices.
- 2.The content of the review should focus on the arguments that support your rating. Explain what stands out from the crowd, whether it's good or bad. For example, if a project gets a 5 star review in marketing because of a fantastic intro video and transparent analytics then mention those items. There's no need to mention lots of other items where the project simply meets industry standards. The goal is to give the reader the most important information es clearly as possible.
- 3.General explanations on a project, like how the technology works for example, are not the most important part of a review and should only be included if necessary. If everyone would explain basic infos in their reviews, the reviews would become very repetitive and boring to read.
- 4.If possible, supply source material with your reviews, like screenshots, links and quotes.
- 5.You should also keep updating your reviews if you have important new information about a project. Users are encouraged to provide feedback on reviews via the comments and analysts are encouraged to incorporate that feedback in their reviews.
- 6.To ensure that our reviews are objective and comparable to those of other analysts, we ask that reviewers keep their ratings to each specific category, without letting their rating be influenced by factors outside of that category. For example, if a project has great marketing but poor tokenomics, the reviewer should rate the project 5 stars in marketing and 1 star in tokenomics. By separating reviews into categories, it allows analysts to focus on their areas of expertise and it makes it easier to compare the reviews of different analysts.
- 7.AI can be used to assist in writing reviews, including translation, and can be used to help better understand a project or the technology a project uses. However, it is not acceptable to use AI to write reviews without any genuine input. Cyrator reviews reflect YOUR opinion, and while AI can be used to help formulate it better, the review should be written by you. We can detect reviews that are purely generated by AI and will remove both the review and the analyst's access to the platform.
This review is very short, to the point and gives you exactly what you need to know.
This review provides very valuable information, exactly for what everyone wants to know. I great buy opportunity for a top project, supported by screenshots and source materials.
This review includes everything necessary in a very concise and easy to read Micro Review. Starts with explaining the score, comparison to other industry players, key points and progress and the challenges the project faces.
This review is short and discusses the idea in the context of the whole industry, rather than explaining it. It's also supported with personal opinions and critical viewpoints.
Examples of poor reviews
[Coming soon]
For all categories, remember to provide context and comparison: For example, when discussing a project's idea, it's crucial to avoid merely listing its features. To illustrate, consider this example: when reviewing a Ferrari, you wouldn't simply say, "It can drive 300km/h, has the color red, 2 seats, and a steering wheel." Instead, you would discuss how it outperforms other cars in terms of speed, has a high resale value, and appeals to luxury car enthusiasts. Similarly, in your review, focus on putting the project's idea into context by comparing it to competitors, explaining its unique selling points, and discussing its market opportunity.
The "Idea" category of a review should concentrate on the unique and exceptional aspects of a project's concept, vision, and purpose. Discuss the problem the project is trying to solve, its target market, and the innovation it brings to the market. Keep in mind that the focus should be on the standout features of the idea, rather than a general description of what the project does. Consider how the idea compares to the competition and its potential impact. By emphasizing the most important and unique elements of the project's idea, you can help the reader understand its significance and how it differentiates itself from other projects in the space.
On chain analysis is used to evaluate the health and usage of a blockchain network by looking at the data recorded on the blockchain itself. The data analyzed can include things like the number and size of transactions, the distribution of token holdings, the use of smart contracts, and other metrics. By analyzing this data, analysts can gain insight into the activity and usage of a blockchain, assessing the security of a network, or understanding the overall health of a decentralized system.
The "Progress" category should include an assessment of the project's progress towards its roadmap, as well as an evaluation of its speed compared to other projects in the same space. When evaluating the progress of a project, it's important to consider factors such as the complexity of the project, the resources available, and the experience of the development team. Ultimately, the goal is to provide an objective assessment of the project's progress and its potential for success in the future.
Tokenomics analysis focuses on the key aspects of a project's token economy that stand out as unique or particularly impactful. Dive into the token's role in the ecosystem, its distribution, and any special inflation or deflation mechanisms. Remember, the goal is to highlight the most important and unusual elements of the tokenomics, rather than detailing every single aspect. By concentrating on the standout features, you can help the reader understand what sets the project's tokenomics apart from the average and why your rating reflects its exceptional nature.
Prospective analysts need to write at least 5 reviews before they can apply for an analyst account. Once you have written your 5 reviews, you can navigate to your account settings and submit your application. However, please read the following guidelines before you start your application:
- 1.Read the "General Guidelines for Writing Reviews" to understand how our community structures reviews.
- 2.You are encouraged to write more than the required 5 reviews (up to 20 reviews).
- 3.Diversify your review portfolio by writing about at least 3 different projects and include both positive and negative reviews. This helps the review panel assess your analytical abilities.
- 4.In your Bio, include information about your skills and knowledge in the crypto industry, as well as any relevant experience. This information will help followers understand your reviews better and also help the review panel make a better assessment of your analytical abilities.
Last modified 2mo ago