But as I said previously, a person sending money to a casino site who doesn't understand the odds will have the exact same chance of their bet winning or losing as an experienced gambler placing the same bet. People who don't understand Ponzis don't necessarily have to be stupid, they may have had google translate fail on them and be unaware that their late-to-the-queue deposit it almost bound to result in them being the one who loses their funds.


This is an incorrect assessment of the legal condition of a Ponzi scheme.


They are not referring to members of that Ponzi being paid referrals for 'recruiting' new participants, they mean the operators of the scheme need new people to join and send their money in. An 'honest' Ponzi scheme generates all of its funds through it convincing new people to send it money, even if it is telling them exactly what it is, the above makes it perfectly clear that it is illegal to run a business which operates that way.

Oh fuck off, shill. Your very first post was in praise of how cm.w had been paying for the previous year, with a nice link to their own payment 'proof'.

You registered a new account solely to talk about cm.w TWO YEARS LATER!

Go back to your real account if you're that bothered about being caught for the shill you clearly are.

A Ponzi scheme *is* a scam and also illegal to operate.

Yes there is, it is that it is illegal to run a Ponzi scheme even if you tell people it is a ponzi scheme.

Oh dear, seems like you tripped yourself up there.

Oh so you're not running ponzi scams in Italy but you had one of the finest lawyers in Italy to supposedly advise you on how you can run a ponzi scheme legally in Italy?

You are so full of shit on so many levels it is quite the sight.

It isn't.

^^^ This. This and every single time, this.

QS, I mean 'Honestbit', if you are so insistent that you will only accept participation from those who fully understand the mathematically unsustainable fact of a ponzi, then kindly fuck off to a different part of the internet and promote it there.

This community action will not stop until the poisonous ponzi scamming threads are all dead.

Just as a reminder so that this page doesn't give newbies the mistaken impression there is a chance this scam is not a scam.

Public Service Announcement -
This is just another Ponzi Scam
Do Not Invest!

Those who choose to post of their participation
support or encouragement for this scam will
be tagged with negative trust for proving
they wish to help the scammers operate this
Ponzi in return for a share of the funds stolen
from other users. Thereby proving they are not
trustworthy forum members.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

So how does that explain the multiple PM's I have received over the previous weeks from people who genuinely didn't understand what the ponzi scheme they were getting involved with actually was, because English isn't their primary language?

See, QS, the trouble is, you can't actually justify running a scam, sorry 'scheme', that risks exploiting people's naivety and lack of understanding in order to profit, you simply can't.

That's why it is ALWAYS referred to as a FRAUDULENT operation.

Besides, there's always the inconvenient fact that Ponzi scams are ILLEGAL no matter how you want to try and spin it, YOU SOCIOPATHIC TWAT. <=--- See what I did there? Even more tone complaint for you to cling to, go on, you know you need to.

Good for you. Now, how about all those people for whom English is not a language they understand well and for whom Google Translate fails in properly conveying the nature of the ponzi scam, I mean 'scheme'?

Do you get it yet? If you run a scheme which requires finding a 'greater fool' in order to profit you cannot do so honestly if you are unable to guarantee 100% that all participants are fully informed as to the facts of the scam, I mean 'scheme'.

LOL, your grossly dishonest argument reminds me of QS. A lot. He employs exactly the same bullshit responses that you do.

Let's look at what you actually said:

Firstly you chose to ignore the consistent use of the word 'illegal' in the third link provided so kindly by shefchenko and tried to run with claiming there was substance to the fact that specific word was not used in the first two citations. I subsequently demolished that dishonest spin by pointing out that, in place of the word 'illegal' both articles used 'fraudulent' instead. Which is still illegal. Everywhere.

Secondly, having been torn a new one over your first asinine distraction attempt you tried this:

Which would be fine and dandy if it applied only to Ponzi schemes, because we are very much insistent that ALL ponzi schemes are scams because of that very same reason. You, however, appear to be trying to imply there is mileage in claiming that there cannot exist a service for which it is guaranteed 100% that all participants would understand what they were sending money to, as though that would magically render your illegal and immoral 'Honest' ponzi to be a just and righteous thing.

Except, of course, your assertion is beyond fucking nonsense because the issue concerns only those services which are dependent on socially engineering other people to send money to them, namely, Ponzi schemes! If you send money to a casino site but have no real understanding of the odds when it comes to a spin of the roulette table, it makes no fucking difference as to whether you win or not. The odds will still be *exactly* the same if you bet on red 13 and are too dumb to know the mathematical likelihood of red 13 being the winning selection or if you are a card-sharp casino-veteran who calculates odds in your sleep and bets on red 13.

Come on QS-Jr, you can do better than that, can't you?

Can't you?

No. You can't.

Twat. <=--- There, I gift you another of your favourite (and QS's favourite, too) tone complaint escape routes you can take. Because I know you've got shit all else to offer in rebuttal.

I didnt think I needed to respond to your second bullshit claim it was so patently absurd, but here we are anyway. OK, as for your second claim about no online service being able to ascertain that all users are fully informed?

Can I get a drum roll please...
.
.
.
.
.ready?

They aren't scams in the first place you horrendously dishonest piece of shit.

As has already been pointed out, a Ponzi *is* a scam but not all scams are ponzis.

Even if you declare your 'scheme' to be a Ponzi you cannot prevent people who do not fully understand what it is from participating. So it ends up scamming them.

Oh, and as I already pointed out, your assertion about all bitcoin transactions having a risk of scam is utter twaddle. So take your tone complaint and shove it up your arse, scammer.

Those first two links are absent the word 'illegal' but both, instead, employ the term 'fraudulent' and fraud, by definition, is illegal everywhere.

Lol, you are so exquisitely dumb.

It isn't me contradicting your assertion, it is a statement from the very same links you posted.

Judging by your attempt to claim there was a way to make an illegal ponzi not be illegal you obviously did not understand the content of those links.

Which part of me pointing out that your ENTIRE FUCKING POST HISTORY is about saying how that scamsite has paid out for so long, thereby showing you to be nothing but a shill for it, confuses you?