Should people who promote ponzis in their signature be given a negative trust?

[winspiral]

@ shorena

we are not in phase...
you believe that I'm a ponzi owner and will soon or late scam...

I believe that you "modify" unjustly my system and your negative point and certainly indirectly the second I have got makes "fishbone" effect in my throat...

But you can be rassured I will not point you negatively for your wrong believehood about my site and me.
Perhaps in a year or 2 you will see that I have given more out that I have get in...and perhaps then you will change your mind about "winspiral"

[GannickusX]

So we tag ponzis after they ran with the money?

if you tag before you can kill innocent ones
If you tag after it is almost too late.

If you think putting all in the same hole and recover them for ever is the best solution then tag...
but please do not cry in the future if you are killing with innocent ones.
perhaps a day you will be in the same situation as me for an other fact.

For you if people do not think same than you they are on the bad side.
Why could people among themselves not play ponzi?
Ok about scammers...but you cannot know in advance if a ponzi runner is systematickly a scammer.
if you think that ponzi's and investment systems are against the rules on this forum,then propose to the rule changing and we are then with forul rules and not imaginative members rules.
if here each member imagine his own rules it is the end of this forum.
If all members here believing that you are wrong "tag" you...what would you say then?
Do you believe then that you are "over" the rules too?

Innocent ones? All ponzi schemes are that, ponzi schemes, we all know how they work, they have to scam in order to exist.

[rz20]

I'm not going to give bad reputation for someone promoting a ponzi scheme in their signature. You should just leave bad reputation to the owners of that website.

[snailmen]

If people know how to tell a ponzi from a legitimate site, I'm sure there's no excuse to advertise a ponzi in your signature then.

[lemipawa]

I'm not going to give bad reputation for someone promoting a ponzi scheme in their signature. You should just leave bad reputation to the owners of that website.

Isn't it bad to promote sites like that since you are like asking someone to use it and you vouch for that site?
So I guess promoters together with the site owner should be liable for the continued spread of the ponzi site because of continues promotion

[winguard]

I'm not going to give bad reputation for someone promoting a ponzi scheme in their signature. You should just leave bad reputation to the owners of that website.

Me too. I'll just post negative comments to the ponzi owners thread if there are any to warn potential victims. I lose money on ponzis too and i only blame myself for not being vigilant.

[winspiral]

I believe that people have not yet done the differency with ponzi and scammer.
A ponzi is a game and if people know that it is a ponzi and what a ponzi is,they know that it is a risky game.

A scammer is not the same level.
A scammer can steal you with a "non-ponzi" site as well.

All hyip are generally ponzi...this does not mean that the hyip runner is a scammer.

If you would be right all ponzi monitors runner should be negative trusted because they promote ponzi or hyip(this is the same)

[cjmoles]

My question is: what are the requirements that would be used to determine which signatures are ponzis and which are not?  All ponzis are not alike and some are very cleverly disguised as legitimate investments.  Most are not even defined as a ponzi until the investors have lost their investment and the scheme has pulled up its stakes.  So, if we're going to give negative trust to those who have ponzis in their signatures, what would be the pillars to determine that fact?

[PolarPoint]

Ponzis and HYIPs are easy to spot. Impossible high return in a short period of time form sites advertising they have a magical formula to earn money real quick and wants to do the community a favour. There is no excuse advertising for a ponzi, it is not ethical. Members who advertising for them should be warned and given negative trust if warning is ignored.

We all have a responsibility to try our best stop these scams. Bitcoin is given bad impressions because of these.

[cjmoles]

Ponzis and HYIPs are easy to spot. Impossible high return in a short period of time form sites advertising they have a magical formula to earn money real quick and wants to do the community a favour. There is no excuse advertising for a ponzi, it is not ethical. Members who advertising for them should be warned and given negative trust if warning is ignored.

We all have a responsibility to try our best stop these scams. Bitcoin is given bad impressions because of these.

I agree that we should all come together as a community to stop the scams; however, I disagree that they are easy to spot....Remember, there were many who classified Bitcoin proper as being a ponzi in the beginning; in fact, I believe there are still some on-going court cases which are still arguing that point.  We need to be careful about where we point our fingers because we my find ourselves pointing into the mirror someday.

[CoinSkipper]

I don't think these guys deserve negative rep unless they're spamming, or fully throwing this ponzi "out there". I think we should give them neutral trust, but with s negative comment.

[tmfp]

....Remember, there were many who classified Bitcoin proper as being a ponzi in the beginning; in fact, I believe there are still some on-going court cases which are still arguing that point.  

This old bullshit again.
What court cases? Link or STFU.

"Many" people believe lots of things, so what?

Negative trust mean what it says, you don't trust them because you strongly believe they are scammers.
Scammer = thief.
People who knowingly run or shill for unsustainable "investment" schemes such as Ponzis, whether in fiat or crypto, are thieves and accomplices of thieves.
End of fucking story.

A ponzi is a game

No it is not.
A Ponzi is a scheme which misrepresents its income in order to steal money from investors. Hundreds of millions of dollars are stolen every year worldwide by criminal gangs operating these schemes. They are most definitely not a fucking game.

If you're talking about the "last in loses" games that are played by people on BCT in Investors and Games, that's a completely different thing altogether.

Mexxer-2 uselessly given me a negative trust, even though I have clearly added, invest at your risk, isnt that just misusing your powers ( he says he is on DT-3 )

Good for him, you deserve it, promoting that shit.
He strongly believes you are shilling for money by advertising a scam and doesn't trust you because of that, so why shouldn't he say so?
It doesn't matter if he's on DT1 or DT101.
Putting "Invest at your own risk" means nothing, apart from confirming that you realise it's a scam in the first place.


Two ninja edits, don't want to be accused of posting for my sig campaign.

[Deluxee]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

[shorena]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Scams are not moderated, the section was put in place after the ponzis made the rest of the gambling section useless.

Edit:
The rule(s) for a sub section are essentially "have enough threads/posts to make it a dominant topic in an existing section". E.g. blockchain.info might get a seperate section if the support posts are too much for the service discussion section.

[tmfp]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Because he's a libertarian and believes in Caveat Emptor, but mainly because the all important "legit" gambling lobby on here was moaning about this type of scheme being promoted in their sub forum.
I've watched it since it started and I think that the kids who go in there with their faucet dust burning a hole in their wallets have understood pretty quick what is real and what is not so, on balance, I think Investor based is a useful sub forum.
I'm not advocating wrapping people in cotton wool to insulate them from the big bad world, but calling out thieves and liars is a different matter.

[Deluxee]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Scams are not moderated, the section was put in place after the ponzis made the rest of the gambling section useless.

Edit:
The rule(s) for a sub section are essentially "have enough threads/posts to make it a dominant topic in an existing section". E.g. blockchain.info might get a seperate section if the support posts are too much for the service discussion section.

Might "8ball of Meth and Rusty AK47 Gift Set" get a separate section if the support posts are too much for the goods section?

If not, why

...I think Investor based is a useful sub forum. ...

As useful as any ghetto, i suppose. The problem's the public face of Bitcoin is now a ghetto.
Grills are laughing.

[winspiral]

....Remember, there were many who classified Bitcoin proper as being a ponzi in the beginning; in fact, I believe there are still some on-going court cases which are still arguing that point.  

This old bullshit again.
What court cases? Link or STFU.

"Many" people believe lots of things, so what?

Negative trust mean what it says, you don't trust them because you strongly believe they are scammers.
Scammer = thief.
People who knowingly run or shill for unsustainable "investment" schemes such as Ponzis, whether in fiat or crypto, are thieves and accomplices of thieves.
End of fucking story.

A ponzi is a game

No it is not.
A Ponzi is a scheme which misrepresents its income in order to steal money from investors. Hundreds of millions of dollars are stolen every year worldwide by criminal gangs operating these schemes. They are most definitely not a fucking game.

If you're talking about the "last in loses" games that are played by people on BCT in Investors and Games, that's a completely different thing altogether.

Mexxer-2 uselessly given me a negative trust, even though I have clearly added, invest at your risk, isnt that just misusing your powers ( he says he is on DT-3 )

Good for him, you deserve it, promoting that shit.
He strongly believes you are shilling for money by advertising a scam and doesn't trust you because of that, so why shouldn't he say so?
It doesn't matter if he's on DT1 or DT101.
Putting "Invest at your own risk" means nothing, apart from confirming that you realise it's a scam in the first place.


Two ninja edits, don't want to be accused of posting for my sig campaign.

If a say "a ponzi is a game" I say it because it is a game.
This does not mean that it is a honnest game or a fair game.
I plaid ponzi in the past...
Now I only invest in "things" which only "could be ponzi" (because often you can not know if they are ponzi)
Often people know that they invest in ponzi...

[GannickusX]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Scams are not moderated, the section was put in place after the ponzis made the rest of the gambling section useless.

Edit:
The rule(s) for a sub section are essentially "have enough threads/posts to make it a dominant topic in an existing section". E.g. blockchain.info might get a seperate section if the support posts are too much for the service discussion section.

Might "8ball of Meth and Rusty AK47 Gift Set" get a separate section if the support posts are too much for the goods section?

If not, why

...I think Investor based is a useful sub forum. ...

As useful as any ghetto, i suppose. The problem's the public face of Bitcoin is now a ghetto.
Grills are laughing.

The sub forum was made to gather all ponzi scams in one place so people know that those ''games'' there are definitely ponzi and if someone tries to promote a ponzi somewhere else the thread will get moved to the investor based games. There is no way to stop ponzies from showing up, if mods deleted them people would just promote them without telling people they are ponzies so we would actually create more scams.

[winspiral]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Scams are not moderated, the section was put in place after the ponzis made the rest of the gambling section useless.

Edit:
The rule(s) for a sub section are essentially "have enough threads/posts to make it a dominant topic in an existing section". E.g. blockchain.info might get a seperate section if the support posts are too much for the service discussion section.

Might "8ball of Meth and Rusty AK47 Gift Set" get a separate section if the support posts are too much for the goods section?

If not, why

...I think Investor based is a useful sub forum. ...

As useful as any ghetto, i suppose. The problem's the public face of Bitcoin is now a ghetto.
Grills are laughing.

The sub forum was made to gather all ponzi scams in one place so people know that those ''games'' there are definitely ponzi and if someone tries to promote a ponzi somewhere else the thread will get moved to the investor based games. There is no way to stop ponzies from showing up, if mods deleted them people would just promote them without telling people they are ponzies so we would actually create more scams.

People here are so paranoïack that they see ponsi even there where no ponzi are...

[Deluxee]

^

*cough*

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Investor-based games

Why would thermos do that?!

Scams are not moderated, the section was put in place after the ponzis made the rest of the gambling section useless.

Edit:
The rule(s) for a sub section are essentially "have enough threads/posts to make it a dominant topic in an existing section". E.g. blockchain.info might get a seperate section if the support posts are too much for the service discussion section.

Might "8ball of Meth and Rusty AK47 Gift Set" get a separate section if the support posts are too much for the goods section?

If not, why

...I think Investor based is a useful sub forum. ...

As useful as any ghetto, i suppose. The problem's the public face of Bitcoin is now a ghetto.
Grills are laughing.

The sub forum was made to gather all ponzi scams in one place so people know that those ''games'' there are definitely ponzi and if someone tries to promote a ponzi somewhere else the thread will get moved to the investor based games. There is no way to stop ponzies from showing up, if mods deleted them people would just promote them without telling people they are ponzies so we would actually create more scams.

For the time being, I'll overlook the likelihood of you posting just for the sake of getting a few satoshi from your 'provably fair casino' sig, and explain to you why every forum on the internet doesn't have a subforum dedicated to ponzis, illegal gambling, or selling shitty drugs, rusty AKs and child porn.
You ready?
Here we go:
Because, surprisingly, yes, yes, you can stop those things. In fact, it is the duty of the forum operator to stop such things.
Even 4chan stops such things, why can't thermos?