Bitcoin Forum
June 13, 2024, 09:34:00 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: "Long-term offers" - gonna have to tackle this 1 eventually  (Read 6565 times)
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 01, 2012, 04:54:52 PM
 #1

1)  this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

2)  in the wake of BCST, are you guys going to really keep this stickied here???  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0    This is simply a list of Ponzi schemes that a long time users is saying have "AA" credit ratings and whatnot.  This is totally, 100% unacceptable - didn't we just do this?  This forum shouldn't give free advertising to scammers IMO.

3)  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105285.0  I am going to dissect each still running Ponzi.  Can't let them get away with it again, can we?

I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1000

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
September 01, 2012, 05:20:32 PM
 #2

Agree.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 01, 2012, 05:25:49 PM
 #3

1)  this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

Agree, I think a better classification or subforum would be "high-risk" or "buyer beware".    

Lowest quality debt rated CCC, or Distressed securities, are commonly defined as those yielding 1500 basis points over equivalent government bonds.  So I would put anything with an equivalent yearly rate above

1-year USA T-Bond Rate (currently 0.2%) + 15% = 15.2%

into a high-risk subforum.

Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:00:20 AM
 #4

1)  this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

Agree, I think a better classification or subforum would be "high-risk" or "buyer beware".    

Lowest quality debt rated CCC, or Distressed securities, are commonly defined as those yielding 1500 basis points over equivalent government bonds.  So I would put anything with an equivalent yearly rate above

1-year USA T-Bond Rate (currently 0.2%) + 15% = 15.2%

into a high-risk subforum.


No.

The easiest way to weed out all the scams would be to require lenders to provide proof of identity, location, current employment etc etc to the forum staff, on the understanding that in the event of a fraud these details will be made public and reported to the relevant authorities.
You could also require all lenders in the lending forum to make public spreadsheets detailing their assets and liabilities. This would have stopped BS&T very quickly.

Put those that don't meet this requirement in a High Yield Investment Programs (HYIPs) category.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:08:42 AM
 #5

this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

The section is for long-term offers, not just HYIPs.

Having forum staff decide whether specific investments are dangerous is definitely something I don't want. Exact rules for what constitutes a HYIP could be defined, but services that don't meet the HYIP definition probably won't be that much safer than HYIPs. And interest rates in the Bitcoin ecosystem are much higher than traditional interest rates, so it's difficult to determine the correct limit. I think a policy of caveat emptor makes the most sense.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:09:19 AM
 #6

The easiest way to weed out all the scams would be to require lenders to provide proof of identity, location, current employment etc etc

Yeah. But have third-parties do this and accredit the investments.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:19:10 AM
 #7

Having forum staff decide whether specific investments are dangerous is definitely something I don't want.

How about having two categories of subfora: "New Schemes" and "Proven Models"? Any investment scheme has to be vetted through the "New Schemes" forum first via user base voting and reaction over the course of a few months. That's reasonably long enough to be able to gauge the overall honesty of the players running the show. If they prove to be for real, then they can post in the "Proven Models" forum.

IOW, any new investment idea HAS to be posted in "New Schemes" so we can all keep an eye on it rather than burden admins with the task. After the community knows they're for real, they can post to "Proven Model". It's not scamproof or foolproof by any means, but it might help a little.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:26:47 AM
 #8

How about having two categories of subfora: "New Schemes" and "Proven Models"? Any investment scheme has to be vetted through the "New Schemes" forum first via user base voting and reaction over the course of a few months. That's reasonably long enough to be able to gauge the overall honesty of the players running the show. If they prove to be for real, then they can post in the "Proven Models" forum.

IOW, any new investment idea HAS to be posted in "New Schemes" so we can all keep an eye on it rather than burden admins with the task. After the community knows they're for real, they can post to "Proven Model". It's not scamproof or foolproof by any means, but it might help a little.

Pirate would have made it to "proven models"... It was around for a long time and had the support of a lot of highly-respected members.

I don't want the forum itself to tell readers what to think. Readers should make up their own minds.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
finkleshnorts
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:30:14 AM
 #9

"Long-term offers" is appropriate and neutral.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:37:45 AM
 #10


Pirate would have made it to "proven models"... It was around for a long time and had the support of a lot of highly-respected members.

I don't want the forum itself to tell readers what to think. Readers should make up their own minds.

Pirate was a special case. He took advantage of his position in the WOT. Most of the new scammers appear to be low on the totem pole or outside of it completely.

I agree with you on people being able to make up their own minds. Admins aren't babysitters. I would see breaking investment postings into two camps as more a community service rather than any kind of nannying.

It's just an idea. I've lurked this forum and the btc world for a while. Consider it as an opinion from an interested outsider. Cheers!
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 02, 2012, 10:55:17 AM
 #11

this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

The section is for long-term offers, not just HYIPs.

Having forum staff decide whether specific investments are dangerous is definitely something I don't want. Exact rules for what constitutes a HYIP could be defined, but services that don't meet the HYIP definition probably won't be that much safer than HYIPs. And interest rates in the Bitcoin ecosystem are much higher than traditional interest rates, so it's difficult to determine the correct limit. I think a policy of caveat emptor makes the most sense.


1)  "long-term offers" couldn't be a worse descriptor for what is contained there.  "Buyer Beware" is appropriate, but would need to be legislated and I can understand not wanting to

2)  These are fake deposit programs.  They are fake entities claiming they are willing to borrow btc, and lots of it, at rates way higher than sustainable.  They are blatantly stealing money (again) and giving this a sticky:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0  is just shameful.  A- rating for a 3%/wk scam?  and it's stickied once again?

3) Why not categorize these borrowing offers by APR?  if you classify them as 0-15% and then 15+ or 15-50% then 51+ then the scams would categorize themselves and no mods needed.

I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 02, 2012, 01:32:44 PM
Last edit: September 02, 2012, 02:13:21 PM by n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU
 #12

3) Why not categorize these borrowing offers by APR?  if you classify them as 0-15% and then 15+ or 15-50% then 51+ then the scams would categorize themselves and no mods needed.

+1

The only truly objective, easy to measure property for all "loans" (legit or otherwise) is their interest rate.  Anyone with an ongoing borrowing business without a hard end date, should be required to disclose the equivalent annual interest rate that they are paying, as part of their thread title.

I emphasize the necessity of requiring standardized annual rates for no-end-date programs, so that readers can do apples-to-apples comparisons between loans, and because a lot of scams hide what would be impossible rates and unsustainable models by breaking them down into daily and weekly terms (example: Pirate).

You could then have:
  • Subforum for quickie loans that are one-time and fixed short duration (term under 6 months).  Not subject to mandatory standardized APY disclosure requirement.
  • Subforum for recurring or long-term (6+ months) loan programs: Annual APY disclosure required in thread title.


Anyone caught trying to get around the 6-month disclosure threshold by stopping and restarting shorter loan programs without full disbursement of all customer funds inbetween, would be subject to reporting/banning/scammertagging.

This proposal keeps the existing free rein wrt. offering legitimate loans, yet makes it harder for scams to hide.  And because it's based on 100% objective easy-to-measure numeric criteria, it would be very lightweight in terms of moderator/admin overhead.  I'm sure plenty of folks will monitor and self-police the lending forum to ensure compliance with above requirements.
Gavin Andresen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 2222


Chief Scientist


View Profile WWW
September 02, 2012, 03:27:03 PM
 #13

I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.

How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
matthewh3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1003



View Profile WWW
September 02, 2012, 03:41:17 PM
 #14

I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.


Some 'Securities' are dodgy or bad investments but with mine 'RSM' - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=63257.0 - It enabled me to buy mining hardware I otherwise couldn't have afforded.  So everyone owns a share of all the hardware and profits.  As long as people trust me not to run off there shares in RSM are backed by part ownership of all the hardware.  It was aimed at other people who couldn't afford (or have time/skills) to buy expensive mining hardware to micro-invest in bitcoin mining.  All major decisions are decided by a motion of shareholders.

Gavin Andresen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 2222


Chief Scientist


View Profile WWW
September 02, 2012, 03:56:26 PM
 #15

Securities scares me because in the USA there are strict laws with even TALKING about securities.

I know, I know, Congress is supposed to make no law abridging freedom of speech. I worry that won't stop the SEC from seizing the bitcointalk.org domain name for promoting unlicensed securities.

I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.

How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1009



View Profile
September 02, 2012, 04:02:53 PM
 #16

I know, I know, Congress is supposed to make no law abridging freedom of speech. I worry that won't stop the SEC from seizing the bitcointalk.org domain name for promoting unlicensed securities.

I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.
.onion would be a good choice of TLD.
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 02, 2012, 09:19:16 PM
 #17

I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.


1) tyvm.  I would love to have you on my podcast, DonkDown radio.  I have so many questions.

2)  I now am blaming the mods for this.  I heard Theymos invested in the giant Pirate scam.  Now Mod John says in this 1.5%/wk scam thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89122.180

He is on his quest to label every worthwhile lender in this subforum as a ponzi-maker. Be happy that he approved you too.  Wink

and then quickly deletes it.

Why are the bitcointalk mods on the side of the scammers?

3) I have intentionally never touched the GBLSE or MPEX as it seems like the SEC should be all over that soon.  It is clearly inevitable given the SEC's history of aggressive action towards unlicensed securities.  .onion that thing ASAP if you ever want to see it again.

4)  I don't know how it took me and everyone else this long to figure this out, but the current crop of "Long Term Offers" and formerly "Lending" had nothing to do with lending - they are all *borrowing*   Maybe a forum with subforums of different borrowing %? 

Sticky at top of 500% APR borrowing forum that says "In the course of human history, every entity borrowing at 500%+ APR has been a scam of some sort up until now" ?


I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
moni3z
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 899
Merit: 1002



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 12:14:13 AM
 #18

Notice how Liberty Reserve and Perfect Money are very careful to distance themselves from any HYIP schemes, even if they're the #1 payment method used for them. There's a good reason why.

Delete all the securities/hyip's and let somebody else run the risk of hosting it.



ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050


Monero Core Team


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 01:18:18 AM
 #19

Securities scares me because in the USA there are strict laws with even TALKING about securities.

I know, I know, Congress is supposed to make no law abridging freedom of speech. I worry that won't stop the SEC from seizing the bitcointalk.org domain name for promoting unlicensed securities.

I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.


I agree. It is the prudent thing to do.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 01:57:20 AM
 #20

I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers'

Why? If people want to throw away their money, I don't want to get in the way. That's what I said before BS&T crashed, and I feel exactly the same now. Perhaps in the future there will be a few borrowers that are legitimately providing enough value to the Bitcoin economy to offer such high interest rates.

I certainly don't want the forum to get into the business of identity verification or deciding whether businesses are legitimate or suspicious. Someone else should do that.

I have several problems with categorization based on interest rates:

- People can just as easily create low-interest Ponzi schemes as high-interest ones.
- If there are too few categories, legitimate investments might be categorized with the scams. If there are too many, each section (especially the intermediate ones) will receive fewer readers. Borrowers would be incentivized to standardize on certain rates.
- When investments have differing interest rates for different types of accounts (like BS&T did), where should they go?
- Interest rates in BTC are currently higher than USD interest rates, and they will increase over time due to deflation, so it's difficult to guess the best ranges to use for the categories.

So I tend to think that doing nothing would be better than adding interest-based categorization. Third-parties can do their own categorization and accreditation. We can link to these third-parties in stickies.

Securities scares me because in the USA there are strict laws with even TALKING about securities.

I know, I know, Congress is supposed to make no law abridging freedom of speech. I worry that won't stop the SEC from seizing the bitcointalk.org domain name for promoting unlicensed securities.

I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.

It'd be easier to just move the whole forum to a new domain name. I don't really want to move it a fourth time, though...

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 02:05:34 AM
 #21

1)  this is not the correct name for high-interest borrowing scams

Agree, I think a better classification or subforum would be "high-risk" or "buyer beware".    

Lowest quality debt rated CCC, or Distressed securities, are commonly defined as those yielding 1500 basis points over equivalent government bonds.  So I would put anything with an equivalent yearly rate above

1-year USA T-Bond Rate (currently 0.2%) + 15% = 15.2%

into a high-risk subforum.


No.

The easiest way to weed out all the scams would be to require lenders to provide proof of identity, location, current employment etc etc to the forum staff, on the understanding that in the event of a fraud these details will be made public and reported to the relevant authorities.
You could also require all lenders in the lending forum to make public spreadsheets detailing their assets and liabilities. This would have stopped BS&T very quickly.

Put those that don't meet this requirement in a High Yield Investment Programs (HYIPs) category.

I agree with this.

Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 02:11:46 AM
 #22

I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers'

Why? If people want to throw away their money, I don't want to get in the way. That's what I said before BS&T crashed, and I feel exactly the same now. Perhaps in the future there will be a few borrowers that are legitimately providing enough value to the Bitcoin economy to offer such high interest rates.

I certainly don't want the forum to get into the business of identity verification or deciding whether businesses are legitimate or suspicious. Someone else should do that.

I have several problems with categorization based on interest rates:

- People can just as easily create low-interest Ponzi schemes as high-interest ones.
- If there are too few categories, legitimate investments might be categorized with the scams. If there are too many, each section (especially the intermediate ones) will receive fewer readers. Borrowers would be incentivized to standardize on certain rates.
- When investments have differing interest rates for different types of accounts (like BS&T did), where should they go?
- Interest rates in BTC are currently higher than USD interest rates, and they will increase over time due to deflation, so it's difficult to guess the best ranges to use for the categories.

So I tend to think that doing nothing would be better than adding interest-based categorization. Third-parties can do their own categorization and accreditation. We can link to these third-parties in stickies.

Securities scares me because in the USA there are strict laws with even TALKING about securities.

I know, I know, Congress is supposed to make no law abridging freedom of speech. I worry that won't stop the SEC from seizing the bitcointalk.org domain name for promoting unlicensed securities.

I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.

It'd be easier to just move the whole forum to a new domain name. I don't really want to move it a fourth time, though...

Bitcointalk shouldnt be actively promoting or encouraging HYIP schemes.

gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 02:19:17 AM
 #23

Themos thinks ponzis are jolly good. He used to peddled one some time ago. Don't count on him to do anything but continue facilitating these scams.

As you can see, he can't understand that by giving these scam-artists a forum with a legitimate-sounding title at the de facto official board he is actively facilitating and helping to promote criminal activity.

This place won't last long...

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 02:31:57 AM
 #24

Bitcointalk shouldnt be actively promoting or encouraging HYIP schemes.

The forum doesn't promote anything. This is a platform for discussion.

Themos thinks ponzis are jolly good. He used to peddled one some time ago. Don't count on him to do anything but continue facilitating these scams.

That was a fun site which published all of the rules. No one was scammed there. I even called it a Ponzi scheme in my signature...

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 02:55:52 AM
 #25

Bitcointalk shouldnt be actively promoting or encouraging HYIP schemes.

The forum doesn't promote anything. This is a platform for discussion.


You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."

Themos thinks ponzis are jolly good. He used to peddled one some time ago. Don't count on him to do anything but continue facilitating these scams.

That was a fun site which published all of the rules. No one was scammed there. I even called it a Ponzi scheme in my signature...

Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:32:51 AM
 #26

Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.

You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."

If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should:
- Ban crackhouses entirely on my property. As a proponent of freedom, I would prefer not to do this.
- Determine which crackhouses may add poisons to drugs and ban them or put signs in front of them. This takes extra work and expertise that I'm not willing to deal with.
- Categorize the crackhouses based on how close to market levels their prices are, which may indicate the safety of the drugs sold there.

Wink

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:37:15 AM
 #27

Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.

You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."

If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should categorize my crackhouses depending on how likely they are to cut dangerous substances into the drugs. Wink

Utterly disgraceful.

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:38:15 AM
 #28

Utterly disgraceful.

Thanks for the detailed rebuttal.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
SysRun
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500


Portland Bitcoin Group Organizer


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:40:08 AM
 #29

Yes, its time mods. make it happen.

Images are not allowed. As your member rank increases, you can use more types of styling in your signature, and your signature can be longer. See the stickies in Meta for more info.
Max 2000; characters remaining: 1781
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:47:56 AM
 #30

If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should:
- Ban crackhouses entirely on my property. As a proponent of freedom, I would prefer not to do this.
- Determine which crackhouses may add poisons to drugs and ban them or put signs in front of them. This takes extra work and expertise that I'm not willing to deal with.
- Categorize the crackhouses based on how close to market levels their prices are, which may indicate the safety of the drugs sold there.

Wink

Man, I would love to buy you diner(it would be cheap: no booze, no coffee, no cigars lol).
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1000

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:48:00 AM
 #31

Nothing wrong with a crackhouse




Need I say more?

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 06:04:42 AM
 #32

I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.


Theymos did you read this?

Does the lead bitcoin programmer's opinion not hold weight here? 

Gavin is embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' - as he should be.  Look at what you did Theymos --> http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/27/3271637/bitcoin-savings-trust-pyramid-scheme-shuts-down  here is another story about how bitcoins are the scam-currency of the now.   

I want to one day read an article that is titled "Micro-lending in Africa succeeds with Bitcoin"  - but if we are ever to see that article written the "Lending" forum can't sticky unregistered securities that derive their value from a Scammer named Trendon from Texas, just because the head moderator has a BTC interest in it.

This shit is bigger than making a few quick coins from a known scammer.  The leaders of this forum must be better than that...


I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
finkleshnorts
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 06:06:55 AM
 #33

Which stickies in the lending forum are you referring to again?
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 06:19:18 AM
 #34

Which stickies in the lending forum are you referring to again?

1) when all of these borrowing at high % scams were under "Lending" a handful of them were stickied.  a PPT was among them, I think BurtW's but I do not remember for sure.

2) Currently in the shameful & misnamed "Long Term Offers" section, there exists this sticky:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0   which is the PatrickHarnett (another schemer) sticky of "Who pays what"  - it is nothing but a list of current Ponzis.  He is a well respected member (to those that cannot see through the 1% per week scam, which should be obvious, but obviously is not to most of this forum's users) and gives an "A-" credit rating for a 3% per week paying "RustyRyan" borrowing scam.  He uses tables and makes it look nice.  But of course, this is just another stickied advertisement for the HYIP scammers and holy shit is it effective.  This is the main bitcoin forum remember - this users Patrick has 1000's of posts and Hero super-member status with a stickied thread - it appears totally legitimate to the newbie not scared by 1%/wk... or 3%/wk... but at least we can agree at this point 7%/wk is a scam?  Ok let's see how low we can go. (hint:  we're not close yet - ask any CPA / Accountant / Bank teller)

3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier.  It's like the mods know these borrowing programs are all scams - but instead of working to stop the culture of scams they take part in them and give them max-effectiveness free advertising while putting up a postage stamp sized warning label so after the scams go belly up the mods can claim we warned you.



I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 06:28:37 AM
 #35

Bitcointalk shouldnt be actively promoting or encouraging HYIP schemes.

The forum doesn't promote anything. This is a platform for discussion.



You shouldnt be seen to be engaging in shady activities as it undermines your position. Its the same reason Nefario doesnt invest in any securities on GLBSE. If there was a drug board on here it would be like putting dread pirate roberts in charge.

If it turns out pirate was running a ponzi scheme how can you adjudicate things with such a conflict of interest ?

The fact you have financially benefitted from the situation makes that impossible. Perhaps it would be better if someone who is impartial could take over the lending section or even remove it entirely from the forum.

You should listen to Gavin imo.





BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1128



View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 11:28:33 AM
 #36

Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.


1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 11:30:25 AM
 #37

Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Giving people the info is a lot different than actively participating in such a scheme  Smiley

BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1128



View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 11:32:59 AM
 #38

Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Giving people the info is a lot different than actively participating in such a scheme  Smiley

I don't.

1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
EhVedadoOAnonimato
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 12:01:05 PM
 #39

Every time I see a thread like this I feel comfortable knowing theymos is in charge of these forums.
It's hard to find such a neutral, "non-interference" person. I'm not sure I myself would manage to remain always impartial like this.

Satoshi was wise even in the choice of who to put in charge of the forum. Smiley Thank you sir!

Concerning the topic, honestly, I'd just merge everything back to the Lending board. It's not the job of these boards to filter what's risky from what's not. Add a big caveat emperor sticky topic to prevent everyone and that's enough, IMHO.
EhVedadoOAnonimato
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 12:04:25 PM
 #40

Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Cheesy
+1
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 12:16:59 PM
 #41

I added a warning to the top of every topic in "long-term offers".

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5236
Merit: 13079


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 12:21:24 PM
 #42

I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
hannesnaude
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169
Merit: 100

Firstbits : 1Hannes


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
 #43

...High Yield Investment Programs (HYIPs)...

Oh. So that's what HYIP stands for. I thought it was
Huhh? Yup, It's Ponzi!
 Wink
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2012, 03:38:01 PM
Last edit: September 03, 2012, 07:51:25 PM by Maged
 #44

I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.

Maybe you still don't understand it either, but https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0  these credit ratings are akin to a 3rd grader writing in crayon on a piece of construction paper which pony she thinks is prettier:

Here is PatrickHarnett's Rating (rememebeer PatrickHarnett himself runs a 1%/wk scam himself) for "RustyRyan"

Quote from: PatrickHarnett
   RustyRyan   3.00%      -      28-Jul-12      A-      10 coin/4 week minimum, weekly payout      https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=96163.0   

Yup, that's right - a 3%/wk scam, A- Credit rating.  Theymos I suppose you either don't care because you are making money or you cannot immediately discern that paying 3%/wk to borrow money & to keep borrowing more of it is literally 100% always a scam.  If you cared or could understand this you would realize the grave mistakes you have made and continue to make in this matter.  You are directly working against the best interest of this community and you are working directly in favor of scammers.

And I have also published my Credit ratings & reviews too:   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105285.0






I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:45:15 PM
 #45

Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Apparently nobody bothered to actually read and understand the thrust of what Theymos wrote.

In his response, Theymos admits to taking part in what he stronly suspected was a ponzi scheme where others were being actively misled about the nature of the scheme. Theymos also proudly asserts that he did profit from this "fun" scam at the expense of those who were misled. He seems to think that the profits are "rightfully" his, despite him knowing that they necessarily were to come from other dupes. By his own admission, he has demonstrated intent to defraud misinformed investors as a participant in a ponzi scheme.

The players can only be innocent if they were truly unaware that it was a ponzi scheme. Theymos stronly suspected it was a ponzi scheme and participated, despite this knowledge.

He then goes on give some flimsy excuse for why he not only tolerates but also encourages all manner of questionable and outright fraudulent activity on this board.

This is contemptible, even if I'm the only one who acknowledges it.

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 03:53:52 PM
 #46

I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.

That so-called credit rating system is and always has been a bad joke. Reminds me of the credit-rating that led to the financial meltdown in 2008. Ratings based on nothing...

and theymos stands ready and eager to give the scammer some legitimacy by going out of his way to make it a sticky.

I hate to ask, but why are you so intent on fulfilling every sterotype of the techno-savvy but real-life naive 20 year old boy?

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
greyhawk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 1009


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 05:38:29 PM
 #47


I hate to ask, but why are you so intent on fulfilling every sterotype of the techno-savvy but real-life naive 20 year old boy?






He's 21.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 06:00:10 PM
 #48

Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is!

Speaking as the interested outsider, it's this kind of attitude that will make it harder for people like me to get other people to adopt bitcoin. Much of how bitcoin is perceived by the world starts here in this forum, like it or not.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 03, 2012, 06:02:43 PM
 #49

This is contemptible, even if I'm the only one who acknowledges it.

I've been watching this story unfold and share your judgement.
Maged
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1015


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 08:00:50 PM
 #50

I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.
I approve of this. The more credit ratings, the better.
And I have also published my Credit ratings & reviews too:   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105285.0
Sorry, but that's an absolute joke. I would guess that it's mostly right, but you've clearly not put any real effort into gathering information. Additionally, you are ONLY focusing on what you believe are ponzis. Where are the ratings for the legitimate investments? If you want to be included in a sticky, you will need to actually work for it.

gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 10:51:28 PM
 #51

He's 21.

I didn't know his age (though I'm not surprised); it was more of a comment about his apparent age as judged by his actions.

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
gene
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 03, 2012, 10:53:04 PM
 #52

Utterly disgraceful.

Thanks for the detailed rebuttal.

I somehow missed this. My response was not meant as a rebuttal -- it was just a reaction. Nausea.

*processing payment* *error 404 : funds not found*
Do you want to complain on the forum just to fall for another scam a few days later?
| YES       |        YES |
John (John K.)
Global Troll-buster and
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1227


Away on an extended break


View Profile
September 04, 2012, 12:16:06 AM
 #53

I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.


1) tyvm.  I would love to have you on my podcast, DonkDown radio.  I have so many questions.

2)  I now am blaming the mods for this.  I heard Theymos invested in the giant Pirate scam.  Now Mod John says in this 1.5%/wk scam thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89122.180

He is on his quest to label every worthwhile lender in this subforum as a ponzi-maker. Be happy that he approved you too.  Wink

and then quickly deletes it.

Why are the bitcointalk mods on the side of the scammers?

3) I have intentionally never touched the GBLSE or MPEX as it seems like the SEC should be all over that soon.  It is clearly inevitable given the SEC's history of aggressive action towards unlicensed securities.  .onion that thing ASAP if you ever want to see it again.

4)  I don't know how it took me and everyone else this long to figure this out, but the current crop of "Long Term Offers" and formerly "Lending" had nothing to do with lending - they are all *borrowing*   Maybe a forum with subforums of different borrowing %? 

Sticky at top of 500% APR borrowing forum that says "In the course of human history, every entity borrowing at 500%+ APR has been a scam of some sort up until now" ?


Since when did I delete my posts? I stand behind every word I say, and at the time of my posting you did label everyone as a ponzi. True, the mechanics of their lending program might be strange considering the weekly interest and not yearly interest, but remember the fact that the spread of MTGOXUSD is sometimes more than 1%, and the weekly fluctuations is more than that. An interest of 1-2% is sustainable given the current pricing fluctuations of Bitcoin.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
September 04, 2012, 12:52:33 AM
 #54

Micon is dead on. Promoting fake "credit ratings" done by a ponzi operator is like letting a fox watch the henhouse. Dude is pulling the long con, and this forum not only supports it, but actively promotes it.

As i said in another thread, we'll see history repeat itself soon enough, and everyone is going to bend over and thank the scammers for the privilege.

Ponies
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 24
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 04, 2012, 01:55:37 AM
 #55

Investing in a ponzi is marginally unethical at best. The bad guys are the scumbags who invest and are shilling for something that they know is a ponzi.

Also patricks thread clearly has no business being stickyed. His credit ratings are completely worthless and based on almost nothing other than the fact that they people are still paying out. Stickying that thread gives it legitimacy that it doesn't deserve.
Micon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014


FPV Drone Pilot


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2012, 02:07:03 AM
 #56

I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.
I approve of this. The more credit ratings, the better.
And I have also published my Credit ratings & reviews too:   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105285.0
Sorry, but that's an absolute joke. I would guess that it's mostly right, but you've clearly not put any real effort into gathering information.

Wait... let me get this straight...

1) you, like theymos, approve of credit ratings and wish more people published them.  (I also agree with this - then over a long sample size (years and years) we will see who has published more accurate credit ratings)

2) you say my credit ratings are a joke, but then in the next sentence say that they are "mostly right" - and I strongly disagree as I think others would that I have "clearly not put any real effort into gather information" on this subject as you claim.


I'm flying FPV race drones these days. Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MiconFPV
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1014


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2012, 06:52:40 AM
 #57


I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.


Agree.

If they are going to stay, do not police them. You will make mistakes and nothing could be better for a ponzi operator than to get whatever stamp of approval the forum starts handing out.

But I think they should go.

If you want to let people talk about whatever it can be in off-topic it doesn't need a serious sounding name like "Securities".

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 05, 2012, 08:38:39 AM
 #58


I think a separate top-level domain for everything under the Marketplace heading would be the right thing to do.


Agree.

If they are going to stay, do not police them. You will make mistakes and nothing could be better for a ponzi operator than to get whatever stamp of approval the forum starts handing out.

But I think they should go.

If you want to let people talk about whatever it can be in off-topic it doesn't need a serious sounding name like "Securities".

Talking about them isn't the problem, it's the active promotion and solicitation.  If the "business" is happening elsewhere, then we won't have dozens of "where's my money" threads here whenever a business fails.  Look at reddit - they discuss the hacks and failures but the reason why we get dozens of threads about each failure here is because it's here where the schemes are launched and promoted and where the operators have solicited users.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1040


View Profile
September 05, 2012, 08:55:40 AM
 #59

Sorry, but that's an absolute joke. I would guess that it's mostly right, but you've clearly not put any real effort into gathering information. Additionally, you are ONLY focusing on what you believe are ponzis. Where are the ratings for the legitimate investments? If you want to be included in a sticky, you will need to actually work for it.

Patricks rating are just as much a joke. AFAICT, he hasnt actually checked any wallet addresses, seen any bank statements or has any way to actually verify that what is being said is true. He is just believing the ponzi operators on their word. Big surprise they all get high ratings. Its frigging hilarious.
hannesnaude
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169
Merit: 100

Firstbits : 1Hannes


View Profile
September 05, 2012, 01:01:27 PM
 #60

Having forum staff decide whether specific investments are dangerous is definitely something I don't want.

And I have also published my Credit ratings & reviews too:   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105285.0
Sorry, but that's an absolute joke. I would guess that it's mostly right, but you've clearly not put any real effort into gathering information.

So, in summary, forum staff should not decide which investments are worthwhile, but they can decide who's credit ratings are worthwhile?  Huh
Either all credit ratings should be stickied or none of them should. But I agree with Gavin that ideally this whole section should move to another TLD.
bg002h
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1047


I outlived my lifetime membership:)


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2012, 02:56:41 PM
 #61

Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.


I won some BTC at this game...a little over BTC2.  I had a good feeling it was a ponzi and will be nearly convinced it was if Matthew loses his bet (to be completely convinced, I'd need to look at a balance sheet and see incoming deposits being sent out as interest payment).  I don't feel morally entitled to the BTC2 that I "earned" in "interest."  I am grown up enough to see that when a story sounds too good to be true, it is. I had a decent hunch I was being lied to when I made my deposit, although the revolutionary nature of Bitcoin does blur the lines between plausible and crazy just enough to keep one second guessing oneself. 

I think it would be best for the community if those who profited on this scheme helped make restitution in some way...although I doubt anyone profited enough to make much of a dent in the losses.

Hardforks aren't that hard. It’s getting others to use them that's hard.
1GCDzqmX2Cf513E8NeThNHxiYEivU1Chhe
stochastic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 05, 2012, 08:10:30 PM
 #62

Just leave everything the way it currently is.

Introducing constraints to the economy only serves to limit what can be economical.
saddambitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1004



View Profile
September 07, 2012, 06:30:11 AM
 #63

I support theymos.  Sorry, bitcoin gods. 

Raize
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1419
Merit: 1015


View Profile
September 08, 2012, 07:26:19 AM
 #64

I've actually considered doing objective-based evaluations on various topics for every single Bitcoin business and offering them the opportunity to explain via Skype, phone, or email their responses then offering a rating because of it. I've only made a partial list and I'll just put two of them here:
If they store Bitcoin, do they have an exit address?
If they provide two-factor authentication, is the third party service/hardware sound?


The problem is that not all of these questions would be universally-applicable and it would be a huge under-taking to do it for free. Also, there are some businesses that would not want to share certain things publicly out of a somewhat legitimate fear of losing competitive advantage. I tend to lean more on the detractor side of this, however. If a business isn't willing to explain how it makes you money, it is very likely the way it makes money is you.

I think a community effort for coming up with objective-based ratings might help get us started, but it could be that we would need multiple people offering this sort of service along with newsletters and "consumer reports"-style review.

To be honest though, we probably needed this a year or more ago. There will be a lot of people claiming we are going on witchhunts or "in cahoots" if we would just up and do it now. It'd honestly be a lot of unforgiving work and the community would be similarly unforgiving if a business went up and disappeared.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 08, 2012, 07:30:29 AM
 #65

If a business isn't willing to explain how it makes you money, it is very likely the way it makes money is you.

This should be in banner bold at the top of the "Long Term Offers" section.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!