This is not an 'error' -- this is the very basic function of the ripple system.  It is capable of transforming social capital/trust (ie that an IOU of 1BTC from a Hero member of this forum might actually be worth something) into financial capital/usable currency.

Also is he scamming or not?  Either he's scamming people on ripple showing how easy it's done, or he's not and he's actually providing 30 odd people a chance to trade with eachother in quantities up to 1BTC whether or not they actually have 1BTC to their name(in which case he's not showing how easy it is to scam 'anyone' at all)

Ripple is about taking the control that central banks have over the money supply and giving it to everyone.

This is not unlike Bitcoin

"Ripple" is a protocol not an entity.  "Ripple" is not going to take your money any more than "Bitcoin" will.

Also I love the logic here -- TF is proving that he is a reputable person who would never scam you by scamming 30 people.  Isn't that what you're saying here? 

I mean, personally I don't think what he's doing is a scam, but isn't that the argument you're making here?

This is not a bug.  Users can trade this BTC to exactly the users who trusted TF who have not yet removed their credit limits to him.  This is by design.  TF might have just allowed 30-100 btc newbies to conduct real trade with eachother who might not have had any BTC to their name, based on TF's trust alone.

Now that seems to be a long shot, but that's the kind of long shot that Ripple at least makes possible.

Why am I getting messages in my inbox saying my posts critical of this experiment are being deleted by you?

If it's a social experiment, then wouldn't you have the incentive to make it seem fairly conducted (ie those critical to the experiment would have their voices aired, and their objections explained)

That's an interesting interpretation however that's still a trade value -- the bitcoin is merely changing hands from node to miner, so realistically that's still an optional trade, and hence still kind of a trade value.  That's splitting hairs though so I'll admit you have a point.

Trusting someone is not a very good way of scamming them.  The 'scam', if there is one here is that people are being made to trust someone.

If I trust you for 100BTC, I am not scamming you -- I am merely telling the internet that you are a pretty solid person and that they should take you seriously(by the way, I do not trust you for 100BTC, as you are a random internet person to me, no offense).

As there's no real reason why people would keep these 100BTC lines as 100BTC(if he's trustworthy, that 100BTC can be increased, if he is not they can be decreased) the interesting thing will be, down the line if people realize that TradeFortress isn't who they thought he was, he might owe each of the people who took part in this 1BTC, with no intent to repay them, even when bitcoin is much more valuable than it is today.  The endgame here is him owing 100 people for...effectively no loss to them. 

That would make him a scammer, and it would also make him so in a very public way.

It's an interesting experiment -- to see if 100 promises of bitcoins are worth one promise of 1 bitcoin amongst 100 people who already have an ability to send money, relatively easily to eachother.  Apparently it is, to some people.

What he's doing here might leave some of us scratching our heads, and it might be wrong...but it's not stealing.  Stealing would be if he cracked the password on your ripple account and sent him a bunch of money(and even that's really a stretch).  We should not immediately say that things which make us feel queazy are wrong, and stealing.  That's how downloading things on the internet became associated with stealing.  What's going on here is a different activity, right or wrong, good idea or not.

The point is -- when you put real bitcoins into an account at an exchange, what are you doing?

You're trusting that they will keep these bitcoins in some form and that you will be allowed to sell them on the exchange for some other currency, and that at some point you will be either able to redeem your claims to that currency or your claims to that bitcoin.

There's no real reason why that trust would have to happen when you send them a bitcoin.  Obviously most of the time it's going to happen that way but it's imaginable that an exchange might have some other reason for assigning you an iou, for example it could be a marketing campaign where mtgox gives out 0.01BTC for every hour of lag or something that their account has experienced.  They would just have to create a credit in everyone's account for that amount, and bang every user expects mtgox to honour it

Now suppose that instead of 0.01 BTC they decided to give 1BTC to every user instead, if you allow them to have access to 100BTC of your account to help them with a new lag-prevention system.  At what point would you say that they stole the money?  After they've taken your 100BTC (which you agreed would help them prevent lag) or when you found you could no longer take 1BTC out of your account that they gave you?

As someone who's interested in getting accountants on this network I would be willing to send you some xrp.  What province are you in?

One of the things you need xrp for is to make connections.  Although you are being effectively scammed here, if you choose to actually continue to do this, it is going to cost xrp.  Unlike bitcoin[which has no use value, only trade value] xrp is needed to use the functionality of the ripple network.

In block 225439, I made a transaction from 1MvwZ6e2PA9QxNimjvq5VuzXpicW2rbzf3 to 13jyPYepRpVdrZsUvnaZm81PYygPsAS9Jk.  13jyPYepRpVdrZsUvnaZm81PYygPsAS9Jk is the address which my android client uses.

http://blockexplorer.com/address/1AeY7XZMzXB4Pz2ri4CsS3vtoT8zwZU7uq

It seems to have been accepted into the blockchain [ie fees paid seem to have been enough], but the client at the receiving end just isn't seeing it.  Should I have the qt-client at the sending end still running[ie will it need to resend?]  It's been some time now since it was sent...

**edit 1**: trying to do a 'reset' forcing the receiving end to reread the blockchain from scratch...

**edit 2**: odd...it crashes when I do that.  Looking up stack trace...

**edit 3**: nevermind, after getting through the crashes, doing a 'reset', android client synced up properly, working now!

Hi.  I'm themusicgod1, and a regular internet dweller.  I am willing to trade bitcoins at the 30 day average or the current sell price at mtgox in exchange for a Ripplepay payment.

I would accept bitcoin as a donation to support my music, and I have a IT consulting business that would also accept BTC as payment for my services as well, altough my current customers do not pay via BTC and they eat up most of my time.

I wish I would have implemented wu wei's ideas like this when I read it years ago.