Stop Neg-Tagging For Ponzi In a PAID Signature.

[mexxer-2]

Who decides who is more evil and who is less evil? You?

Its opinion based, but anyone can see the rate 12coins is advertising is going to collapse, while oremine has a lower rate of ROI. It does however seems that it is going to collapse soon too.

[1715348553]

1715348553

[Lauda]

I disagree with the title. There is also another thread about this in Meta but this isn't a discussion about the forum. People on D&T have the right to give out negative as they see fit (unless they abuse it). The people who are promoting ponzis know what they are doing; actions have consequences.

People here don't care whether one of their community members get scammed through the ponzi ad they are having in their signature spot. They just care about the earnings.

They should care and that is the problem. In order to make the community better in general we should be working together in order to avoid scams and whatnot. This is why they should not be promoting ponzis.

[kotwica666]

I disagree with the title. There is also another thread about this in Meta but this isn't a discussion about the forum. People on D&T have the right to give out negative as they see fit (unless they abuse it). The people who are promoting ponzis know what they are doing; actions have consequences.

People here don't care whether one of their community members get scammed through the ponzi ad they are having in their signature spot. They just care about the earnings.

They should care and that is the problem. In order to make the community better in general we should be working together in order to avoid scams and whatnot. This is why they should not be promoting ponzis.

I agree with that!

But why people that wear signature of scammer are getting negative trust? I'm not sure if all of them know that behind some signature is scammer or not. Example is Ore-mine - there nobody get red trust, now 12dailycoin - everyone.

If everyone will have his own justice, it could end badly.

In my opinion - if there is obvious scam behind any thread/campaign - just report to administration should be enough, and this action should be banned.

Edit: CloudMining.Website have signature campaign around 9 months and nobody do nothing..

Edit2: What i want to say is - we should to decide - or we let ponzis stay here, or we ban all of them.

[Heutenamos]

This is why they should not be promoting ponzis.

Seconded!!!!!

But why do i see a new scheme every other day i get on forum ? why do i see hundred pages long thread bout them ?

I agree that my earning's are not more important than the losses of innocent but i would like to ask why the need of Resistance/Ignorance ?
If a complete newbie jumps into one of their threads and finds it interesting to invest enough then nobody is responsible ? but the user is responsible if the newbie clicks on their signature and does the same thing.

Your discussion is valid when they are disallowed completely.

[Keyser Soze]

Maybe people should stop whoring themselves out for a few bits and make the choice not to promote a (likely) scam?

It seems pretty simple to me, if you promote (likely) scams, then people may think you are untrustworthy and leave you negative trust.

[Panthers52]

-snip-

Geez QS, changing sides with an awesome argument , every account. I still wonder how your alts get figured(most of the times I guess they don't)
Edit: What would you say to your own argument here:

You are promoting what is pretty clearly a ponzi that is being deceptive about how they make their money. Not only that but you still have the signature up that caused you to receive negative trust.

If you are really concerned about your reputation, then I would suggest that you stop promoting what is clearly a scam

?

Someone that promotes a ponzi takes away from their reputation, and anyone that knowingly promotes a ponzi is not reputable in my eyes. As I said before, I would not personally advertise something that I had reason to believe is any kind of ponzi. Additionally, I do not think that others should be promoting a ponzi, however I do not believe that those that do promote ponzis are scammers.

I would say that the most effective way to stop people from advertising a ponzi would be to warn them that they are advertising something that you believe to be a scam, and the majority of the time people will take their paid signatures down.

QS was advising that person to remove the signature of the ponzi if their wish was to maintain a positive reputation. I do not believe that QS's statement contradicts with my previous statement as the lack of having a positive reputation and being a scammer are two different things.

[mexxer-2]

QS was advising that person to remove the signature of the ponzi if their wish was to maintain a positive reputation. I do not believe that QS's statement contradicts with my previous statement as the lack of having a positive reputation and being a scammer are two different things.

Lets clear the argument later, but first, why are you talking to yourself in 3rd person?

[james.lent]

QS was advising that person to remove the signature of the ponzi if their wish was to maintain a positive reputation. I do not believe that QS's statement contradicts with my previous statement as the lack of having a positive reputation and being a scammer are two different things.

Lets clear the argument later, but first, why are you talking to yourself in 3rd person?

He's in full-on panther mode.

[Lauda]

But why people that wear signature of scammer are getting negative trust? I'm not sure if all of them know that behind some signature is scammer or not. Example is Ore-mine - there nobody get red trust, now 12dailycoin - everyone.

Because they are promoting a service that will eventually cause damage especially to new (inexperienced) users.

Edit2: What i want to say is - we should to decide - or we let ponzis stay here, or we ban all of them.

If it was up to me, I would remove them from this forum this very second.

If a complete newbie jumps into one of their threads and finds it interesting to invest enough then nobody is responsible ? but the user is responsible if the newbie clicks on their signature and does the same thing.

Your discussion is valid when they are disallowed completely.

But newbies do not know that those investment schemes do not work and eventually end up scamming the people.

[favdesu]

not easy to answer.

I gave the OP of 12coin neg for running a ponzi and promoting it... but what about the participants?

I tend to support a neutral rating, and give them some time to overthink their participation. if they still promote after 1 week or so, change neutral to negative

[Heutenamos]

But newbies do not know that those investment schemes do not work and eventually end up scamming the people.

Yes, this is why the forum has an equal contribution as signatures for such scam attempts.The newbie doesn't know what it is and he doesn't even knows where to question it and what's the difference if he clicks on the signature or clicks on the link present on the thread.

if they still promote after 1 week or so, change neutral to negative

lmao....well of course that's your opinion but don't you think judging a person on such a less time-consuming/informative event is appropriate ?

Tagging or not tagging is all bullshit drama,I am talking bout the behavior.Don't you think it's non-sense if you call every guy a Muslim who wears a cap ? there are many reasons and not everyone is promoting Islam ? but on the other hand every guy wearing it is promoting Islam one way or the other.

So you cannot get to the righteous conclusion until you speak to him and get to know the reason for him wearing it.

[favdesu]

But newbies do not know that those investment schemes do not work and eventually end up scamming the people.

Yes, this is why the forum has an equal contribution as signatures for such scam attempts.The newbie doesn't know what it is and he doesn't even knows where to question it and what's the difference if he clicks on the signature or clicks on the link present on the thread.

if they still promote after 1 week or so, change neutral to negative

lmao....well of course that's your opinion but don't you think judging a person on such a less time-consuming/informative event is appropriate ?

Tagging or not tagging is all bullshit drama,I am talking bout the behavior.Don't you think it's non-sense if you call every guy a Muslim who wears a cap ? there are many reasons and not everyone is promoting Islam ? but on the other hand every guy wearing it is promoting Islam one way or the other.

So you cannot get to the righteous conclusion until you speak to him and get to know the reason for him wearing it.

your logic is twisted. you can't compare religious behaviors to supporting and advertising a crime/fraud.

[Heutenamos]

But newbies do not know that those investment schemes do not work and eventually end up scamming the people.

Yes, this is why the forum has an equal contribution as signatures for such scam attempts.The newbie doesn't know what it is and he doesn't even knows where to question it and what's the difference if he clicks on the signature or clicks on the link present on the thread.

if they still promote after 1 week or so, change neutral to negative

lmao....well of course that's your opinion but don't you think judging a person on such a less time-consuming/informative event is appropriate ?

Tagging or not tagging is all bullshit drama,I am talking bout the behavior.Don't you think it's non-sense if you call every guy a Muslim who wears a cap ? there are many reasons and not everyone is promoting Islam ? but on the other hand every guy wearing it is promoting Islam one way or the other.

So you cannot get to the righteous conclusion until you speak to him and get to know the reason for him wearing it.

your logic is twisted. you can't compare religious behaviors to supporting and advertising a crime/fraud.

I think every religion is fraud/crime,they ask help/money/goods from people/community and take millions and billions of donations to store them in trusts so they save taxes and do whatever shit they want cause no one is there to ask them.

How many casino's/dice are registered legally ? but they are promoting or advertising on Forum.I think except bitdice.me i haven't seen anyone with  an actual legal license.If you dig deeper you will find a significant amount of fraud/crime going on around us on this forum but depending on the region and level.

[kotwica666]

I'm really afraid that this discussion is pointless.

Of course we all don't want scammers here.

Problem is in practice impossible to resolve.

Perfect solution is ban all scammers - ok - how to recognize scammer? Sometimes it is obvious and quick ban is not a problem. What about this users that maybe are scammers or maybe not.

If we start giving bans only because "we think so", i'm sure that will be many mistakes and scandals. If we don't want problems we have to create a reliable system to recognize scammer/ponzi - and this is impossible..

I'm very close to solution like this:
1. Giving negative trust persons who after warning is continuing action (for example after 24h.) if this is first attempt. If second - direct tag. If third - ban.
2. However, in special cases (example - winspiral) if arguments are good enough time to clarify situation should be longer (for example 5 days)
3. If Ponzi announces very clear rules of operation - let it be.

I know that point 3 is a bit controversial, but if someone is clearly explaining how construction of bussines is working and warn people that are joining to very risky game - is it scamming?

[Heutenamos]

is it scamming?

until the second before they run ,it is a No.If they run with the coins, yes it is/was scam.

[kotwica666]

is it scamming?

until the second before they run ,it is a No.If they run with the coins, yes it is/was scam.

But when you start playing blackjack or slot machine you know the risk. You can win or you can lose. When you lose it means that dealer or machine run with your money? In some way yes, but before you start this game you know the rules.

[erikalui]

I agree with the reasoning of the DT members who leave negative trust ratings for members who promote scam websites in their signatures. They also remove the ratings if the user/s stop promoting those websites and there should not be any reason except earning few bitcoins for wearing those signatures.

1. Promoting a website/company that's a fraud one is as good as being a part of their scam and agreeing with it.
2. The bitcoins one earns for promoting these websites is the money earned by scamming other users.
3. One is encouraging scams and by not participating in such campaigns, these campaigns would stop their scam on the forum.
4. Ponzi websites are 99% scam and they dont give the users the amount they have promised to give. If they manage to explain the DT member/s of how they promise to give the returns to the users, they wont be terms as scam then.


Also, it's high time the forum admins also try to stop the scamming on this forum. Though they have not implemented such rules, there is no need to let these KNOWN scam websites to operate on this forum. With the result, these scam websites would not be eligible to have campaigns here and users wont fall for their promotional benefits.

[kotwica666]

I agree with the reasoning of the DT members who leave negative trust ratings for members who promote scam websites in their signatures. They also remove the ratings if the user/s stop promoting those websites and there should not be any reason except earning few bitcoins for wearing those signatures.

1. Promoting a website/company that's a fraud one is as good as being a part of their scam and agreeing with it.
2. The bitcoins one earns for promoting these websites is the money earned by scamming other users.
3. One is encouraging scams and by not participating in such campaigns, these campaigns would stop their scam on the forum.
4. Ponzi websites are 99% scam and they dont give the users the amount they have promised to give. If they manage to explain the DT member/s of how they promise to give the returns to the users, they wont be terms as scam then.


Also, it's high time the forum admins also try to stop the scamming on this forum. Though they have not implemented such rules, there is no need to let these KNOWN scam websites to operate on this forum. With the result, these scam websites would not be eligible to have campaigns here and users wont fall for their promotional benefits.

Everything what you wrote is very nice but now check this thread and look what is going on:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1322129.0

People with negative trust are joining this campaign and they don't care.

What then? Only deleting thread by Admins can help. Why they don't do that? Because there is no proof of scam i guess..

[erikalui]

Everything what you wrote is very nice but now check this thread and look what is going on:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1322129.0

People with negative trust are joining this campaign and they don't care.

What then? Only deleting thread by Admins can help. Why they don't do that? Because there is no proof of scam i guess..

I dint notice that campaign but thanks for letting me know. It's sad to see that so many members just don't care about scammers and just care about few bitcoins.

There is obvious proof that the site is a scam and if admins can't take a strict against against these ponzis, then it's best the members do get a negative trust only as they deserve it for knowingly helping scammers. Although, I don's see this working because Jr. Members don't care for their reputation and they must be having alt accounts which should be detected and negated as well.

[kotwica666]

Everything what you wrote is very nice but now check this thread and look what is going on:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1322129.0

People with negative trust are joining this campaign and they don't care.

What then? Only deleting thread by Admins can help. Why they don't do that? Because there is no proof of scam i guess..

I dint notice that campaign but thanks for letting me know. It's sad to see that so many members just don't care about scammers and just care about few bitcoins.

There is obvious proof that the site is a scam and if admins can't take a strict against against these ponzis, then it's best the members do get a negative trust only as they deserve it for knowingly helping scammers. Although, I don's see this working because Jr. Members don't care for their reputation and they must be having alt accounts which should be detected and negated as well.

I'm pretty sure that only negative trust rating will not stop ponzi storm.. But.. We can't do nothing more.