Algorand Standard Asset Verification - Choice Coin

One of the challenges the Choice Coin community has been facing since early August is verifying Choice Coin on the AlgoExplorer and the Algorand Wallet. So, I wanted to create this post to aggregate community information on the asset verification process for others who may face the same issue and to request any help or guidance on the process the community may offer.

To start, ASA verification is an important part of the Algorand ecosystem because it allows the Network to ensure an asset is trustworthy, unique, and valid. Moreover, AlgoExplorer and the Algorand Wallet are great technologies, which provide immense value to the Network as a whole - Choice Coin developers use them both everyday. Rand Labs, which is developing AlgoExplorer, and Algorand LLC, which is building the Algorand Wallet, have done an amazing job creating breakthrough technology.

We are happy and eager to work with the teams building the Algorand Wallet and AlgoExplorer to ensure that Choice Coin meets their standards for asset validation and verification. However, we have had trouble making contact with these teams in a meaningful way to allow the verification process to take place. My hope is that this post will help facilitate Choice Coin verification and be a source of information for the ASA verification process more generally. Thanks in advance for any thoughts, feedback, or suggestions.

For reference, here are some links to Choice Coin resources: Choice Coin White Paper; Choice Coin GitHub; and Choice Coin Website. Additionally, I have included the verification information requested by AlgoExplorer below.

Description Choice Coin is a governance token and open source software for decentralized voting. Another way, Choice Coin is a digital asset used to solve the decentralized governance problem, referring to the complex process by which assets are allocated across decentralized networks. Choice Coin solves the decentralized governance problem by providing a mechanism by which decentralized organizations can vote securely using post-quantum cryptography. Embedded within the Choice Coin architecture is an AI software for ensuring regulatory compliance according to an algorithm for optimality.

Asset ID 297995609




Choice Coin was approved on the Algorand Wallet this afternoon. Thanks to our community for the help and support!


Hi Brian,

Daniel here from Randlabs. We understand your frustration. AlgoExplorer is developing a new automated verification process which will directly address this topic you mention. It should be released soon. Please, be patient.

-Randlabs Team-


Choice Coin is now verified on AlgoExplorer. Thanks so much to the amazing team at Rand Labs for their help!

1 Like


I found a great website for converting .png files to .svg files.

Nice one going true the same stress here, I almost got scammed in Algorand Discord while searchingg and asking for help on how to verify an Algorand asset and this article has helped me to know how to do it, Diging dip as a dev has brought me this far.
The validation/Verification of UPGROW COIN
ASSET ID: 536379213
Website logo

Description: UPGROW $ROW is a community gaming token built on Algorand Blockchain Technology, designed to only grow high.
$ROW is beyond a play to earn gaming project on web3.0, as it has it’s own uniqueness, that is, the spendable currency in the games it’s bringing to the Blockchain.
The interesting part of all, is that $ROW is a community driven gaming project, which means the community can mention their favorite games and $ROW will bring it to the Blockchain.

$ROW community will enjoy the possibility of earning and spending $ROW on everything in the game, buying new characters, new stuffs, unlocking new levels and many more etc.

1 Like

I’m writing this post regarding the new asset verification process on Algorand. After months of being verified on the network Choice Coin is no longer verified on Algorand. The new Reputation System for asset verification has two higher levels than Neutral: Notable and Verified.

The problem with these requirements is that they create arbitrary and potentially illegal requirements for assets to become verified. For example, notable status requires assets have reputable investors. However, in many cases, assets may not wish to take on investors - this is particularly important for projects creating utility tokens. Another example is projects that are bootstrapped. There is simply no reason why an asset should have to take on investors to receive notable status. Critically, in many cases digital assets are not investments, but rather products or keys for use.

Secondly, verified status requires projects list on a centralized exchange. This is a problem because many projects, like Choice Coin, have no intention to list on a centralized exchange because they wish to stay decentralized. In many cases, listing on a centralized exchange creates a higher regulatory risk for projects because some centralized exchanges market assets as investments and require institutional contracts for listing. Similar to the requirement that notable projects take on investors, the requirement that verified projects list on a centralized exchange should be removed from the verification process.

Verification should be about validating projects with a valid use case, development team, and products and services. Choice Coin will not pursue verification on Algorand under the new rules because the requirements are against our core mission, interests, and strategy for future growth.


Hi Brian, i am investor in Choice Coin because I think is a very good asset and the future. I have another tokens in status neutral like $Choice now but they still keep the verified status in Pera Algo Wallet and Tinyman. So what is happening with $Choice? Last month burned a lot a Tokens and in every page that i checked look like the same 1B of CHOICE in total supply and 100% circulating supply. When Choice show the update of the new amount of tokens.



Please read our terms and conditions. Choice Coin is not an investment and should only be used as a utility asset for voting. The asset is extremely volatile and decentralized, so noone has control over the asset’s performance. We did burn 675M last month, which can be viewed at the burn address on AlgoExplorer.

However given the complexity of constantly updating the circulating supply and the arbitrary difference between the circulating and total supply we aren’t planning on asking any data aggregators to adjust the numbers. Choice Coin is a decentralized governance platform and you can view our progress on software development on GitHub. Thanks for your support. We will have new votes coming up with the launch of v2, which is expected later this month.

1 Like

Thanks Brian for take you time in answer me. I am in on the project since they was launched. But I don’t share your opinion about the investment. Every asset that you are available to put money is one investment. Second if you don’t take time to update the amount of circulating supply how i can be sure that the address with 717 M of $Choice is Blocked and later don’t go out to the market??

Of course. Thanks for your interest and engagement. On the topic of investing. My point is we do not market Choice as an investment, nor do we support or encourage people to use Choice as an investment. On the burn address, we did a live random rekey to protect the address from being accessed by anyone. You can see the rekey transaction on AlgoExplorer.

Many people have requested we continue to work toward being verified on the Pera Wallet. Pera Wallet is incorrectly stating that it has an automated and simple procedure for verification. In fact, to verify an asset, PeraWallet is requesting we send a zero Algo transaction from the Choice Coin creator address with a specific note in the comments.

Given, the creator address has been rekeyed for security, the only way to send a transaction from the address is programatically. Moreover, there is no known existing code base for completing this task on Algorand. Currently, in the process of facilitating the transaction, I am working on debugging the following code.

# Steps
# 1. Import Algorand Python-SDK
# Start by importing the necessary dependencies from the Algorand Python-SDK.

from algosdk.v2client import algod
from algosdk import account, encoding, mnemonic, transaction 
from algosdk.future.transaction import AssetConfigTxn, AssetTransferTxn, PaymentTxn, write_to_file

# 2. Connect to the Network 
# Connect to the Algorand Network using the [PureStake API](

algod_address = "" 
algod_token = "" 
headers = {"X-API-Key": algod_token }
algod_client = algod.AlgodClient(algod_token,algod_address,headers)

# 3. Set Voting Variables
# Set the variables for voting using Choice Coin and for the specific reserve's Algorand address.

asset_id = 0
reserve_address = ""
reserve_phrase = mnemonic.to_private_key("")

# Send
def verify():
    params = algod_client.suggested_params()
    amount = 0
    verify_address = ""
    comment = ""
    transaction = AssetTransferTxn(sender=reserve_address, sp=params, receiver=verify_address, amt=amount, index=asset_id, comment)
    signature = transaction.sign(reserve_phrase)
    final = transaction.get_txid()
    print ("Verify.")

I am getting the following error.

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 37, in <module>
  File "", line 31, in burn
    transaction = AssetTransferTxn(sender=reserve_address, sp=params, receiver=burn_address, amt=amount, index=asset_id)
  File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/3.7/lib/python3.7/site-packages/algosdk/future/", line 1324, in __init__
    self.index = self.creatable_index(index, required=True)
  File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/3.7/lib/python3.7/site-packages/algosdk/future/", line 300, in creatable_index
    raise IndexError("Required an index")
IndexError: Required an index

The error is referencing line 37, the function call:

and line 31, the transaction:
transaction = AssetTransferTxn(sender=reserve_address, sp=params, receiver=verify_address, amt=amount, index=asset_id, comment)

Ultimately, the error is:
IndexError: Required an index

However, I am not sure what the required index is referring to or how to remove the bug. Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated.

For PeraWallet, there is a wealth of information available to verify Choice Coin as a legitimate project on Algorand. We already went through this process. There is no sound reason for withdrawing our verification status. See Choice Coin: A Solution to the Decentralized Governance Problem and Choice Coin DAO R&D.

I have also received the same error with the following transaction variable:

transaction = AssetTransferTxn(sender=reserve_address, sp=params, receiver=verify_address, amt=amount, index=asset_id, comment=comment)

Hey @bhaney44 – This is Taylan from Pera Wallet. We’ve solved this issue for a handful of ASA creators who ran into the same problem before. Instead of complaining on Twitter and on these forums, you could have simply emailed us or connected with us on our Discord and you would have been verified by now. I just happened to see your comments by chance.

In any case, please send an email to and we will find a way to support you and get you verified. Happy to help people who ask for help.

Hi Taylan - thanks for the reply. I’m writing here because I didn’t have access to the email or your Discord before you explained that was the proper method for contact in this post. Generally, I think asset verification is still a problem on the network, especially compared the process on Ethereum which is singular and automated. We were already verified on PeraWallet after I wrote here in September and then without any contact - we were unverified, so now we have to go through an arbitrary process again. Regardless, I will follow up via email and thanks for reaching out. - Brian

1 Like

I wanted to follow up on this after our email thread. It critically important you change your process for asset verification. The current verification process is poorly thought out and results in a lot of time waste and illegitimate outcomes. For example, you verified Moist Grannies, a profane meme coin. But you continue to refuse to verify Choice Coin, which is a leading research hub on the Algorand network (Overview). As it stands, the process does not verify the legitimacy of projects and leaves the network vulnerable to fraud.

Finally, you should have never removed Choice Coin’s verification. Once a project has gone through the process of being verified, it should not be to your discretion to remove it without good cause. Otherwise, the renewal process could simply be required continuously and for arbitrary reason.

1 Like

As another example, you also verified Angels of Ares, which is actively committing securities fraud in the United States pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 77a - 77aa.

Hi @bhaney44 – Thank you for the feedback. Before I jump into my response, I would like to set the record straight about this statement from you:

But you continue to refuse to verify Choice Coin […]

This is patently false. As you are very well aware, we have been trying to assist you in getting your ASA verified. We actually went out of our way to track you down to this thread, even though you didn’t reach out to us, and tried to assist you.

Once again, we appreciate your feedback. However I would like to make it clear that we completely disagree with you when it comes to the verification program. Actually, the fact that you are asking for special treatment is proof of why we need the new, automated verification program.

The earlier version of the verification program put Algorand, and later Pera Wallet, in charge of judging ASAs on the network. In other words, the person running the program was tasked with figuring out whether a specific ASA owner was a good or bad actor. This proved to be a horrible approach for verification, since it was very error prone and resulted in several rug pulls and scam attempts by verified ASAs.

The new verification program is completely automated by design. We are not judging any ASA, we are simply gathering and exposing data, and confirming that an ASA is owned by the same person that points to its website. In additon to this, we are collecting verified ID information about each ASA owner. That’s it. This is the complete extent of the Verified badge. We are not vouching for any of these ASAs because that would be an impossible task in the first place.

You had some legitimate feedback about issues in the automated process. We hear you and we will work to improve gaps. In the meantime we are offering our time and assistance to make sure that any ASA that wants to get verified, gets verified. However they need to go through the process to be fair to everyone.

When we offered our help to you and made our resources available, your response was that you were “too busy”. You are asking us to give you special treatment when we haven’t given special treatment to anyone. Every verified project, including AlgoFi, Folks Finance, Yieldly and many others went through the same process without issues and got verified. Yet you feel that you should be treated differently from everyone.

Our door is always open if you need assistance, but you need to go through the correct channels. You have our team’s emails and you can always reach out when you are not “too busy”. However no special treatment will be given to you, or any other ASA owner.


First, the new process is not automated. Automation refers to a lack of human interaction necessary to facilitate a programatic process. I have had to engage in considerable interaction with you - as required by your verification process - in the past week and still, you refuse to verify Choice Coin. There is no software or website where I can submit Choice Coin information to verify the asset with PeraWallet, which is a problem because it is not automated.

On Ethereum, the process is actually automated and it’s also decentralized because anyone can simply fill out an online form with important information about the project to verify the asset. In fact, we had no problem getting Choice Coin verified on Ethereum without any long email threads or forum requests. You should absolutely automate the verification process and follow the Ethereum model because the model you are using is fundamentally flawed, subjecting you, PeraWallet, and Hippo Labs to unnecessary liability.

Second, I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking that you return the verification to Choice that you wrongly revoked. You should not revoke verification from assets and then demand they spend significant resources to fulfill new and arbitrary requirements. Again, if you can at will remove our verification after we spent considerable time and effort going through the process the first time, then there isn’t any mechanism preventing you from doing it again. By definition that is a system of arbitrary rule, and not one in which I wish to participate.

Third, I have no desire to continue with the verification process for Choice Coin. However, other members of the Choice Coin community constantly complain that you removed our verification. Yet, they are not able to submit information for verification, which is a fundemental problem because Choice is decentralized. Other members participating in the Choice Coin network should have an avenue to get the asset verified without me, especially since the creator address is now de facto empty.

You and your team have not provided any help in the verification process and you aren’t even doing basic due diligence in researching projects. Moreover, you and your team have clearly failed to implement a sensible verification policy as evidenced by the fact that you are knowingly validating projects committing fraud, such as Angels of Ares and Moist Grannies. In fact, you are only verifying asset creators and their associated domains, which allows for fraudsters to slip through because you are not verifying actual use, legal compliance, or software development.

In short, the process is arbitrary and unprofessional. You have the ability and knowledge necessary to return Choice Coin’s verification and still refuse to do so, which has an adverse impact on the project and on Algorand. Additionally, I’ve worked hard to make substantial information available to you for purposes of verification.

GitHub | White Paper | Medium | YouTube | Algo Grant | Forum Overview | Forum R&D | Research Papers | Application | CoinMarketCap

If you want help replacing your current centralized and manual verification process with an automated and decentralized process, please feel free to reach out. In the meantime, you should implement a sound verification policy, do your due diligence in research, and return Choice Coin’s asset verification.


1 Like

Hi Brian,

just fill in the form… Pera ASA Verification

it took less than 30 minutes to get verified by pera… if i remember correctly

Also you want to get verified by the AlgoExplorer as they have different verification process…

Even if you do a DAO it does not mean that you do not register legal entity… If anybody is doing any business activity without legal entity, it is illegal business in most jurisdictions (as far as I know)… I guess the verification process by pera and algoexplorer is trying to prevent illegal business activities which is absolutely right…

You can register for example BBLLC in Vermont…