Regarding investment, there's a principle that cannot be compromised: if the project team is dishonest, just pass immediately. No matter how promising it looks, it's useless. Even Warren Buffett has emphasized that he would rather give up profit opportunities than cooperate with unreliable people.

But there's a detail worth elaborating on. The scoring of "dishonesty" by the project team can be discussed in two categories: one is the product itself tied to the management's reputation—that is, the success of the product depends entirely on the founding team's execution and transparency. The other is when the product is so strong that it is hardly affected by the management's quality—such cases are rare and basically nonexistent.

Here, I focus on dishonesty related to financial transparency. For example, some projects have a history of financial fraud, regulatory penalties, or even legal disputes. Even if the fines seem small, such projects should be eliminated outright. Why? Because one act of fraud reveals the team's bottom line.

It's necessary to distinguish two types of "dishonesty": one is the personal conduct of the founder—such as misconduct in personal life or other legal disputes. While these do reflect character, if they do not involve the project's finances and operations, their impact is limited. The other is the real dealbreaker—financial statement fraud, false advertising, or hiding critical information. The former may still have room for discussion; the latter must be vetoed outright.

So don't be lazy during due diligence. Check whether the project has a history of penalties, whether financial audits have been passed, and whether the promises in the white paper have been fulfilled. These public pieces of information can tell you a lot. The project's history is like its resume. Once you find "criminal records" (here referring to fines, lawsuits, or other formal penalties), you can basically make a judgment—