How exactly is your system risk free? Is there a trusted third-party hedge against the risk that you default? Are you able to name this insurance provider so that a potential investor can independently assess your claim and so investors can reclaim their investment from the insurance provider in the event they lose contact with you? Or is it the case that if you disappear, the funds that investors have invested also disappear? Or do you still not regard "you" as part of "your system"?
You are 100% right.
If I disappear...all investment disappears...
This does not mean that my system is "not risk free"
My system is "risk free" but not my managing.
I have already seen:
Risk free babby seats.
This does not mean that the babby is 100% sagfe in this seat.
it is same about our discussion.
I propose 2 systems.
A is a risk free system
B is a risky system.
I agree that it is risky to invest in both because all the reasons you talk about.
To resume:
it is risky to invest in winspiral's risk free system...(lol)
...
Of course it means your system isn't risk free. If it didn't, we could say that holding funds on MtGox was "risk free". If it didn't, we could say that "investing" money in a ponzi is "risk free".
You - winspiral - do not operate a risk free system. You are a part of your system, and you are a risk - whether you like it or not, whether you accept that or not. Even assuming that you're a paragon of virtue and would never run away with other peoples' money there are other ways investors could lose their money. You burying your head in the sand and pretending otherwise doesn;t alter that.
Dude, people look at your system and - rightly or wrongly - think it's dodgy. You know that - you're sensitive to comparisons with ponzis. You should be doing all you can to reassure potential investors that it's not. Instead you're running around making claims that - at best - you don't understand, and - at worst - are downright untrue. That doesn't reassure potential investors. There's nothing wrong with risk - risk is the flip-side of reward, we expect to take risks with our investments - but there is everything wrong with dishonesty. Pretending you can separate risk posed by the exchange operator from the overall risk of holding funds on the exchange, the ponzi operator from the ponzi, or you from whatever-it-is-you're-operating - these are all incorrect, dishonest, false.
They are many difficulty words in your saying...it will take me a long time to translate them and then it is not sure that i will undertand the right meaning.
You should be doing all you can to reassure potential investors that it's not.
I have investors in both of my systems.
in principle the risk of "my default" is same for both (the risky system and the risk free one)
My investors know the difference between system's risk and external risks.
My sponsor who sent me cash to publish their banners or link have not made such story you make about risk.
They trust me have sent me the few dollars or euro and basta...
They have taken the risk that an "problem can occure"
You do not understand that I offer opportunities to make cash...
And you ask me to reassure potentiel investors?
For example in my cloudmining system i offer free shares and you ask me to reassure claimers or investors?
What do change for me if I have less investors?
Nothing...absolutly nothing.
With my "risk free" system...
why should i reassure potentiel investors?
if all actual investors stop to invest and if no new investors invest...then all profit is for me?
Why should I lose time to reassure ?
if you had taken the time to analyse my systems...(risky and riskfree) you had noticed that it is market regulated.
Absolutly no problem with the risky one where it is almost impossible that noboddy claims because the reward do increase if no claims.
With the other one...(the risk free) people have to invest...
but let suppose that the investors stop investment...then the profit will be so hudge for 0.001BTC that you can be sure investors will be interested.
It is why I have not to follow your advice...
If I reassure or not...it will not change the "external" risk.
