thanks. while i definitely see where you’re coming from, there are instances whereby coins are legitimate, but simply have not yet been verified. as @doc said - we want to encourage these people to go through the process of verifying their tokens. a warning icon communicates that they are ‘cancelled’ from the getgo, and moving the toggle into Settings complicates matters in some cases:
in addition to incognito native coins, lesser-known coins from other chains are also not automatically verified. the process is partly manual at this point, and depends on a number of factors. for example, some newer external projects have added their own coins to the pDEX, and after raising awareness in their own community, supplied significant liquidity, after which the verified tick was given. among other things, the pDEX aims to give all legitimate projects a fair chance at visibility and adoption, without the same predatory listing fees charged by other exchanges. we believe that this an important problem to solve.
I do feel like we need to strike a balance between making major coins more visible, and not immediately penalizing newer projects. this list also appears in a few different cases - trade yes, but also shield, and add a coin. not many users will want to buy an unverified coin maybe, but some users want to port a more unknown token into the network, and some would want to add incognito native tokens created by the community to their list, etc.
incognito aims to be inclusive and interoperable, but as you say, also intuitive and safe to use. To do that we’ll need to find a way to balance both viewpoints and interests. we don’t claim to have all the answers just yet, but i hope this message helps to clarify some rationales.
thanks again for your input, we’ll definitely keep it in mind going forward.