Bitcoin Forum

Throughout my whole life I have always thought that if you "vouch" for someone, then you are telling people that you trust that person. You also agree to take responsibility for that persons actions.

Now to my question. If you "vouch" for someone that they are trustworthy and they take a loan, is the person who vouched putting their reputation on the line? If you didn't trust a person to repay, why would you "vouch" for them?

Curious to see what others say about this.

Let's put it this way... if someone from my inner circle asked me to vouch for him (let's say, if it was an unsecured loan).

And if I did this, it would imply that if the debt was not paid, the debt would automatically become mine.

Very short and probably the most simplest way to put this and am quite sure that's the sole reason people don't always feel comfortable vouching on someone behalf and not on the note that the person can't pay but sometimes life has it up's and downs and you can never know what's going to happen next so it's better to know the journey you are taking by vouching for someone when it's involves a matter of loan.

I can vouch that a particular user is trustworthy, maybe in one of my posts, or in their trust page, if that user goes on to take a loan and defaults, then it is not on me. But if a user is about to take a loan and i am called upon or i decide on my own to vouch on their trustworthiness in repaying the loan, if the loanee defaults, then i have plenty of the blame on me.

IMO vouching for someone is like being a surety for that person. Like the word “surety” implies you have to be sure of that person you’re vouching for. You don’t just vouch for anyone, you cannot really know a person until you have had financial dealings with them. In most cases where a guarantor or reference is needed, it means the person doesn’t have credibility to access thr loan, so the reputation of the guarantor will be the currency with which the person is purchasing the loan.

I don’t think the debt automatically become yours should the person default. However you are required to provide the whereabouts of the person who took the loan. If you can’t do that, then people may start to think you also had a part to play in the scheme.

Yes, if you are vouching for someone then you will be responsible for the dealings. Let say if you vouched for someone that he's a trustworthy person and he pays loans on time, and after your vouch a lender agrees to give that person a loan.

That person has got the loan because you vouched for him and the lender trust you not that person, if he somehow doesn't pay the loan back then the one who vouched will be responsible. And, there is big chance that the one who vouched may end up paying the loan if other party run away.

On this forum we can see so many members run away after taking loans, Sashan's lending thread is a good example for us to see such people. I believe one should try his/her best to not vouch for someone else because if the other person doesn't pay the loan then it can impact the reputation of the one who vouched for that person.

You’re mainly right. If you vouch for a person, then you’re letting people know you trust that person and can attest to their actions. It doesn’t necessarily mean you agree to take on the responsibility for the actions of that person.

If you vouch for someone, you also put your reputation on the line as that person would not ordinarily be taken serious without your word. And if the person takes a loan with the help of your influence and doesn’t pay back, you won’t be held liable to repay the loan. Unless of course you initially agreed to pay if the debtor doesn’t pay.

You could also offer to willingly pay back the loan in order to protect your reputation cause when next you’re vouching for someone, People may not be that willing to accept just your word.

You make a fair point.  Vouching for someone means putting your own reputation on the line to speak to their character or credibility.  However, it does not equal blanket endorsement of everything they might ever do.  The scope matters.  For instance, I could vouch that someone is honest in a particular situation without claiming they will never tell a lie.  Its circumstantial and  Im sticking my neck out based on what I know of them in that moment or context.

Even honest people sometimes fail their own standards.  So vouching is not a lifelong guarantee as much as staking my belief in who they are, right then and there.

For example, if user "A" votes for user "B" during a loan collection, it directly means that user "A" will take full responsibility to repay the loan if it is defaulted by user "B.". Vouching for anyone anywhere means that the person vouching has agreed that they trust the person, and they must also be made to agree to face full responsibility for whatever the person they vouched for commits. 

In some local villages of my country, during loan collection, the borrower usually visits the lender with one or two witnesses who stand as guarantors to vouch for the borrower. If the borrower fails to repay the loan, those guarantors will take the responsibility because they vouch for the him during the loan collection.

I can vouch for the disingenuous question the O.P. is asking.

What does the word vouch mean? To support certain evidence. Vouch for someone means to say that that person is good, honest and trustworthy. It will be good if people don't use word vouch. Even if they use, no one should expect to receive anything from them if they get financial or other kind of damage from the person that they vouched.
I think that no one thinks about guarantor when they hear word vouch. Anyways, it will be good if no one uses words lightly.

Yap, a vouch for someone means that you are ready to take on their obligations. With that act alone, you enter your reputation, and, logically, your reputation will be conditioned by the final result of such a deal.

I have bad experiences with those things, so I wouldn't dare to vouch for someone in a financial deal, loan or whatever. Very careful in real life, but not at all online.

When someone risks their reputation to guarantee someone in a financial deal ^{[for example in the case of a loan]} - then the most important thing is that the worst consequences should not be ignored.

Someone who is honest and trustworthy with us will not necessarily behave the same way when dealing with other people. In the real world - someone I trust because of his honesty will not be guaranteed to be honest when I recommend him to someone managing a business. Maybe a disclaimer is needed - he is trustworthy to me, but giving him a loan or something like that is at your own risk.

In that case, it cannot be called a vouch.
The OP asked about "vouch", and I understood that word as an unconditional guarantee. No additional footnotes, disclaimer etc... such as he is trustworthy to me, but giving him a loan or something like that is at your own risk.

Things change, people change. You can be a highly respected and trusted member of any community and everyone would vouch for you and your behaviour up to that point, which is valid. If you then do the complete opposite I would not hold the people who vouched for you accountable at all, unless they knew nefarious or malicious things were going to take place.

I wouldn't vouch for any service I haven't used in the past or haven't grown to trust over time, otherwise I would look at it as shilling. I don't see any point of vouching for them if I don't trust them at all, unless if there is some hidden deal/interest I am not talking about. By vouching for them, yet I have never used their service or loaned them any money, should anything go wrong, my reputation should be under fire as well.

I got curious and took you off unignore for a second. It's pretty sad that you have lowered yourself basically to the level of an internet troll here on the forum. You ruined yourself and now just troll users for what reason? I'm sorry you fell you are more important than you are, you may as well just go hang out in a local board cause nobody here really gives a damn about you these days. The way you act lately because of your own actions knocking you down, is pitiful. Such a waste!!

Absolutely, if you say someone's good for a loan and they end up not paying it back, that makes YOU look bad.  Your name and reputation are on the line.  It's like you promised everyone "Trust me on this dude" and then dude flakes out and leaves you high and dry.  Not a good look. 

So why even vouch for somebody if youre not positive they're responsible enough to repay on time? Doesn't make much sense to put your own credibility at risk for some random buddy you hardly know and  you gotta have faith the person will handle it right or there's no point sticking your neck out.  Really, you should only vouch for people you truly believe in and feel confident will do the right thing.

According my cultural traditions, before you vouch for someone for loan neither the person is your bosom friend or your relative, and you know the person character too well even it hideout, so for you to vouch for the person you have decided to repay the loan if the person in question is unable to its debt, so it's either you repay the debt or you look for the person that collected the loan and present him to the person or organisation he collected the loan from,

Else you will be the person to pay the loan since the person you vouch for is not were to be found, so we take much of our time to decide who we will vouch for, and something of this nature is applicable to your friend  come to borrow money from you, neither you declined to lend your friend the money he wants to borrow or you give him give him any money in your possession if you don't want you guys to separate because the money you lend him. In all if someone that lend money is unavailable the person that vouched for him shall hold responsible.

Being a guarantor on the Internet for a person with whom you communicate only online, without knowing his whole life outside the Internet, is very risky for me. We know thousands of stories where people have gained trust for quite a long time, creating the impression of a very decent person, but one day there is an explosion and you see his real personality.
For me, there is a big difference in the definitions of the words “trust” and "vouch." I can trust a person; I can trust something personal that is not related to others; but I will be careful to be responsible for the actions of another person

No offense, if you trust the person, why you didn't lend your money? I feel like if you didn't want to lend your money, it means you're not completely trust the person. Yeah you could argue if you don't have enough money due to your needs or the amount is too big, but the point is you can lend the money you currently have, not necessary to lend when you have full amounts.

Are you sure? I'm not, @OP is one of among users that has a privilege.

I saw people to vouch for others but then asked to do the due diligence for any scam or unexpected result, the voucher is not liable.

I can not mention the specific threads but if my memory is working properly I saw it many times. However I do not see anything wrong in it. Not everyone of us is using words in proper manners. It may be different for native English speakers though.

Suppose I vouch for someone I have experienced that the person's character is accurate based on what I'm vouching for him, but that does not mean that the information about the guy is correct or accurate. which is why, I never vouch or guarantee anyone when it comes to a loan, If I didn't trust the guy would repay a loan I would not vouch for him because my decision to vouch for him leading to getting a loan would backfire in my reputation.

You can vouch for anyone but that does not mean your vouch is accurate on the character of the individual so you have to make it clear that it is based on your experience of how trustworthy the guy is and not what the real character of the guy is.

I wouldn't go that far unless it was explicitly stated that the person who vouched for the borrower would be responsible for the debt in case of a default.  What I would say for certain is that the reputation of the person who vouched for the borrower might be called into question if the borrower turned out to be a scammer.

That word "vouch" can mean different things in different circles of people--in some, it can mean your life if you vouch for the wrong person while in others it might mean far less.  So I'd say there's really no concrete answer to your question, yahoo62278.  If you're strictly talking about forum matters, I'm going to stick with what I said in the first paragraph, i.e., that it's a reputational risk one takes when vouching for another member unless other terms are stated outright.

The first question that comes to my mind when I hear the word "vouch". Why would anyone vouch for someone who is anonymous in the forum as the question was asked here. The next question that will come to my mind is that the person who has vouched is related to that person in any ways. If that is the case then it is the person who vouched has to take all the burden of the loan borrowed incase that person is unable to pay the loan.

In my personal transactions, the word “Vouch” means that you guarantee that the borrower has sufficient assets to repay that loan or has family/friends/acquaintances who can repay that loan. Therefore, if a problem occurs and the loan is not repaid, you can force him to sell those assets or talk to others to repay the debt for him.

In short, it is your responsibility to make him pay the debt, whether directly or in installments.

Being a guarantor for anyone at all is risky. Knowing someone physically, and even living with them does not guarantee you can predict their actions. Online communications, some of the time can give off more about a person than a physical encounter would and guide how you relate with them. But do not vouch for people casually, if you can "vouch" for more than 2 people you know (both online and off), I'll consider that to be a little too much.

Only trust yourself at all times.
Trust yourself to trust others dependent on the situation.

Definitely, vouching for someone especially for the purpose of loan is already equivalent of being a co-maker of the loan which the person you vouch make because that person will not get the loan without your vouch.

This crucial here in the forum since we are all anonymous and our reputation is the product of our action here. It’s important to not vouch to someone here because you will never know what he will do because he will surely dragged your own reputation. Yogg is the best example here, he is very reputable and probably people that deal with him can easily vouch for him before he commit the massive scam on his cards. This is a disaster if someone vouch for when he take a huge loan then later on commit the scam.

I once become a guarantor or a vouch for one guy from his loan, its a legal loan coming from a company and they need a guarantor for that kind of deal, I vouch for the guy because I believe he has the capability to pay the loan and we've been together for a long time that I know he has a good character and he will not put me at risk or his reputation,

If you are going to vouch then you believe that the guy will repay the loan, you should not vouch someone who you think will not repay the loan, you partake responsibility when it comes to taking loan,so be careful who you vouch.

You can be guarantor to someone you know very well, like your good friend and your siblings, if that is last opportunity for your siblings for them to start up their journey of richness you will sacrifice to vouch for them because you know from home, saying vouching for someone is risk it depends on the individual difference.

It's the worst I can do, to vouch for someone online, online relationship is just a mere relationship that doesn't hold water strong, what we needed to do before we guarantee anyone...

First: we have to know the person physically not only online

Second: we have to know home and house number of the person and also know joints or bars or sports activities where the person normally enjoys he or her life, because we endorse our signatures as a guarantor.

Third : you also have to know three or two persons that someone you want to be guarantor for, if you have the person information of this three categories, you can guarantor the person because you have a backup...at this point it's not longer a much risk.

I would say it depends. But if you say like this below the answer is very simple. Yes!  :)


If you say a person is trustworthy to take a loan and he get granted the loan because of that it's up to you to solve the problem if he don't pay back himself period.
It's the same as to be a creditor to a friend/family member if they don't have a good credit you can help them to be a creditor when they gonna apply for a loan if they fail to pay back it will in the end land on you.

But also in the end, if the person pay back that loan and what he does after that should not affect you but it should be some kind of communication also.
You cant be responsible for a individuals actions for the rest of your life, everyone and everything changes with time.

Here a conclusion can be drawn.
Guarantee, Reputation is at stake and don't believe it.

Here there are three different understandings, Guarantee which I know is responsible for the user concerned financially that is the basic point, if the person concerned does not keep the promise, Of course the guarantor is responsible for everything, which is certain that he has staked his reputation on the user.
Now you don't believe it, why is he guaranteeing it? In fact, this point of view, if interpreted broadly, can be viewed from pity, consideration and remembering, here tolerance is born between people, not the basis for believing it, That's where it appears again and applies to guarantors considering the value or property, in other words, the guarantor looks at and carefully examines the limits of the user's loan history, In other words, the guarantor's issuance does not exceed the risk to the guarantor and the guarantor may also hope for the agreed reward, for this reason, if the right occurs, the guarantor does not look at it from the perspective of trusting it, but from the perspective of the reward from the guaranteed user in the future.

The same as guaranteeing, but there is a reward agreed to the user concerned, not a basis for trust.

I have noticed this word more often when it comes to boards like Digital goods where members sell digital things, and in order to "start a business" they often give a "vouch copy" to a few high ranked members who then have to write an honest review. I've always thought it was a very slippery slope, because for just a few $ I would never guarantee that other buyers would also get what they paid for - especially if the seller has products that range from a few $ to several hundred $.

When it comes to publicly expressing our trust in someone that they will do something that is expected of them, and if that doesn't happen, we can certainly feel somehow responsible if it doesn't happen. I could do such a thing for several members of the forum that I trust, and I would have no problem being financially responsible in case something goes wrong.

In my proxyban topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5350260.0), a "vouch" basically means: "I think this guy is not a shitposting spammer".

In Dutch, that would be "garant staan", which Google Translate turns into "guarantee". "Vouch" is "instaan" in Dutch, which boils down to the same thing. I looked up the Dutch meaning to see if there would be subtle differences.

So I think you're right: vouching for someone means it becomes your personal obligation to make sure whatever he does gets paid. But I also think the word "vouch" is being used lightly (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5350260.msg62151715#msg62151715) online.
That being said, I would never vouch for anyone :P Money can destroy friendships and family parties. I'd vouch for my kids though, if they fuck up I'm liable anyway.

Good point. Who would vouch for me if I take a $1000 loan? It's pointless: if you'd vouch for me, you could just as well give me the loan yourself. At least that way you'll earn the profit that comes with the risk.

I have always used the word “vouch” for when they have been trustworthy with something for me. The trust level can change in the future however, but the vouch stays for their legitimacy, since you trusted them with something and they went through with whatever it was

It feels different however if you’re asking around looking for people to vouch to back up the persons trustworthiness because if I said someone was trusted, and then they scam(without me knowing their intent ofc) then I would feel guilty.

Of course, he puts his reputation on the line, and even more so, his wallet. By vouching for a creditor, you agree to bear the burden of responsibility for his debts. Therefore, if you take on this obligation, it would be good to have some leverage over the lender. Of course, if you don't want to engage in charity and pay other people's bills.

In fact, the bank only needs a guarantor as a backup option from which it can extract debts for the creditor.

I can vouch for someone based on our past dealings and the person might have changed his behavior over time. But there is a difference between serving as a guarantor for a loan and to vouch for someone. If you guarantee that someone will repay a loan, you are liable if he defaults but you are not responsible if you just vouched that the person will repay the loan.

Apart from not having the funds to lend to a friend, why would I have to lend money to someone when some people or organizations offer such a service? Don't also forget that lending money to a friend or relative also has some repercussions. Your relative or friend might not willingly pay back a debt because of a close relationship. They might be trustworthy but the closeness might mark them default because they know that there will be no penalty and you will always consider them. It is ideal for your relative only funds you can afford to forgo.

If you're vouching for someone, you you should accept responsibility for your own words. Be man of his words. I don't like when people when people talking without thinking about consequences of their words. If you behave in this way, your vouching is just worthless and you're just ruining your own reputation.
And after all, we are talking about vouching people who you never saw face to face and communicated just online. Maybe you shouldn't hurry with vouching something and you should do that with people that you REALLY trust and you're ready to accept responsibility if something goes wrong.

I agree with Hhampuz, people change. You can’t really predict what can happen in an online community like this, circumstances can cause a person to do things that are out of character. We trust people based on their previous actions and expect that their future decisions will be in line with what they have done in the past. I was still new to the forum then but I remember this thread quite well as it was a huge discussion:
 Bitcointalk Charity and it’s funds (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376475.msg58687880#msg58687880)

Yes they are are putting their reputation on the line, but they cant be responsible for everything that happens with person they vouched for.
I cant guarantee that someone wont run away with money if they have some emergency, or that something could happen to them in real life and they never return to forum.
Better think good before vouching for anyone you consider to be your virtual friend.

I will give more context in a few days, everyone is free to leave their opinions and there is no wrong answer. Just curious what people think of that specific word. There have been some great replies so far for both sides. On the weekend I will post why I asked the question.

In simply term vouch is like a guarantor who will stand for you for if anything is found missing and if such takes a loan then the person has payback the loan to lender that is why today many people are running away from that except you want to vouch for the person living in the same house with you, whom you know that at any point you can hold and pressure the person to go pay out their loans. Therefore before you are being hired to come stand or vouch for the person you should also know the implications and for that such person must be only trusted by you meaning you knows his ways about and you knows that person in to-to

Because your friend will seek help from people around him before he taking a loan from sharks, banks or other organizations. You don't need to submit any information and you don't have to pay interest (depends on the agreement, usually it's friendlier), so I'm not sure why you can say like that.

If you think your trustworthy relative or friend won't repay back the debt, it means they're not trustworthy.

It seems like you're too early to label other people, you shouldn't label them trustworthy just because they're your family or they're nice to you. Test them with money, live together with them, act stupid, act like a poor, etc you will know their true faces.

---

Apologies for precedes you, but this might be the context you meant.

He said he didn't take any responsibility for any deals, but not everyone will agree with that since each DT user has a different brain. At least he's one of respectable user, so I don't expect his reputation will ruined just because that newbie become a scammer.

If I were him, I would create a thread to post all evidences of our trade, and then use that thread as reference of my feedback. I won't give any vouch, but at least I've show if I've trade with him without any problem in my feedback.


For me the loan is unrealistic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5484170.msg63616961#msg63616961), if he can make money from gambling, he can do it using his own money.

I would be careful about using the word "Vouch" - if I am vouching for someone, it means I can speak for them to be trustworthy and probably I would be knowing that person in real life. In the internet, this term is thus dangerous to use because the one who is vouching for someone might end up in trouble if, < make that "when" the person being vouched for, cheats.

After all this is just a forum, but business related stuff are done here and often the sums are not ignorable. I have seen the recent loans happening between a certain "Poker master" and the sharks of this forum, I have my doubts and having been on the side of the sharks at one time on another site, I would not indulge in lending to such users.

I believe this is what the context is about. 8)

I'm not sure why you felt the need to dig or be curious the reason for the question. You needed a gold star? I wanted opinions without giving context so the opinion wasn't biased. You may have thought you were being cool, but in fact you just ruined the question and all other comments from this point on will be tainted. Way to go!!! In the future please avoid my topics if you're going to try to get a gold star.

So, this is a little awkward, coming in here because of the tag(s) I've been getting over the past 12 hours or so. Sadly, as OP notes, the tag has tainted the thread, and my biased opinion is, unfortunately, part of my response.

To start off, I fit the description. I've vouched for a person once only on this forum, recently, for the authenticity of a borrower. The vouch was that he is who he says he is, does what he says he does. I believe the only other vouch I ever did on BTT was for a mixing service (I forget which precisely, it didn't last long) -- that the service worked as it claimed.

My vouch is my word. I agree with OP almost absolutely. If I vouch for someone, I trust that person and take responsibility for their actions. That said, in my vouch of this person, I specified that I claimed no responsibility for any loans. I couldn't possibly, unless I were ready to act as guarantor for sums I couldn't possibly predict.

In the same way, if I vouched for a service on BTT, I couldn't possibly be held responsible down the line, were that service to rug pull or scam. Like the mixer I vouched for.

For further context to why I think like this -- I believe that I've "sanctioned" services on this forum simply by giving them a prominent space, either via advertising (signature campaign) or sponsorship. I recall when a forum UCL pool sponsor ended up folding and losing member deposits, how distressed I felt. How many people signed up and deposited money because they thought a pool sponsor was trustworthy? How many people did I inadvertently lead down that path because of their big fat banner on the pool? Not one person held me responsible -- but nevertheless, I felt some guilt. All I could do was put warning messages on threads I'd created bearing the sponsor's name. In addition, that casino has apparently repaid all its BTT depositors, so my conscience rests.

All that explained, I've been made aware that the person I vouched for is running into serious repayment challenges. Though not one lender has turned to me, yes, it still distresses me. So I have been taking some responsibility and am doing what I can now to get the borrower to close out his loans. It remains to be seen how far I'll have to go with that involvement, but I'm hoping for a swift conclusion. Lessons learnt, all around. For myself as well.

P.S. Incidentally, I've recently been in real life discussing the merits of a "Certificate of Good Conduct" which many governments issue to employers and educational institutions to prove that applicants are who they say they are, and have no past (serious) criminal records. You could call it a "vouch" from a government on a person's identity and good behaviour, but it seemingly provides no guarantees of future behaviour. Does it imply responsibility on future behaviour? I would hope so, but have not found conclusions to support that.

Actually, it's a "vouch" of not getting caught in any of the crimes they may or may not have committed. That's a subtle difference.

The word vouch has been used many times in the forum and real life and the meaning remains inconsistent because the word has to be taken within the context of the situation and conversation. You can vouch for someone on the basis you will become a guarantor if they default on a loan whilst it is also to vouch for someone that you will not become a guarantor if they default on a loan.

I have seen members vouch for campaign managers when companies have created threads looking for someone to handle their forum signature campaigns but none of those members would volunteer to pay even $1 from their own pocket if the campaign manager ran off with the escrowed funds. When they made the vouch they knew they would not cover any potential losses from their own pocket but it still did not stop them from vouching.

The word has been used a lot without but it can only be used correctly if the one vouching states explicitly what he is going to do/not do in the event his vouching of another person leads to a problem.

As Helena Yu has already guessed, this thread had to do with a "vouch" from a trusted member buwaytress. I wanted honest opinions from everyone of their interpretation of the word as a certain situation was unfolding that has now calmed. Either way I feel it's a teaching moment for everyone because sometimes actions may have consequences.



buwaytress was just helping his friend out and left a disclaimer he isn't offering any form of guarantee. Problem is potential lenders may not see it that way. I realize that ultimately the deal is between the lender and the borrower. Not telling everyone not to vouch for someone, but be prepared to accept consequences if something should happen because of your words.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean?

Like I said, if you're going to vouch for someone, then your reputation is on the line if he defaults on a loan. You don't agree?

Heh, ever the realist. In fact, depending usually on your economic, political, or social standing, even more accurately, it's a "vouch" of not getting convicted of any crimes they may have been caught/accused of doing.


Certainly something I'm coming to terms in this respect.