Someone give you negative trust for participating in a PONZI?

[Stroto]

Well now it becomes interesting. And funny.

According to the links in this source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country in Russia and Thailand bitcoin is considered illegal.

So the question arises, if members give people negative trust because in their jurisdiction it is illegal to participate in a Ponzi, shouldn't we give everyone negative trust because in some jurisdictions it is illegal to trade in bitcoin in general?

[minifrij]

Where is illegal to invest in? Has anyone ever been arrested for investing? Not running the ponzi, investing

Ponzis and Pyramids are illegal full stop. If I am a part of a mafia crew, I'm not above the law because I didn't kill anyone.

abuse is defined as : use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.

its literally the first thing that came up when i googled it

Trust abuse isn't defined in the same way as abuse on this forum. I'll see if I can find what theymos considers abuse somewhere; I'm sure he posted about it before.

Also, are you implying that I have something against OP because he is on DT?
I literally found out that he has on DT just minutes ago

No, I'm implying that you have something against the person that left him negative trust by the way you commonly post things similar to this:

Yes OP, the self appointed police made new forum laws a few hours ago

I'm guessing that you have some sort of thing against users such as cryptodevil, mexxer and Lutpin who leave trust that you do not see as appropriate (despite being given good reasoning several times).

That source only talks about the small state of the USA and not the international bitcoin community

Which is why I updated with several sources from official websites of several countries. I am obviously not going to source every single country this way; you can easily find this information yourself. I also mentioned that participation in such schemes may differ from country to country.

So the question arises, if members give people negative trust because in their jurisdiction it is illegal to participate in a Ponzi, shouldn't we give everyone negative trust because in some jurisdictions it is illegal to trade in bitcoin in general?

I knew someone was going to bring this up.
This is BitcoinTalk. If someone visits this site where Bitcoin is prohibited, they cannot try to claim innocence due to the glaringly obvious title. However, someone new to this forum/Bitcoin in general may see "Get ##% back on your Bitcoin every hour - ReallyLegitInvestments" and be interested. Nothing from this gives the impression that such a service is prohibited, making it very easy for someone naive and inexperienced enough to take advantage of this offer and possibly be scammed.
People should do their own research on things that they invest in, but they don't. This is why the trust system was implemented - so other people can research and report on services and give their impressions.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

Let me get this straight, maybe i'm a little slow i cant clearly understand, is investing in a ponzi illegal in your country or any other?

Going by your logic, everyone involved in a shootout using an illegal gun shouold be jailed, even if they have nothing to do with it

edit: also, why are you protecting mexxer-2 and lutpin?

[minifrij]

Let me get this straight, maybe i'm a little slow i cant clearly understand, is investing in a ponzi illegal in your country or any other?

Yes. I live in the United Kingdom if you would like to do further research. Regardless, promoting ponzis is immoral at best. It's completely deserving of a negative trust IMO.

Going by your logic, everyone involved in a shootout using an illegal gun shouold be jailed, even if they have nothing to do with it

Just like being in a Mafia ring doesn't make you innocent, neither does investing in a Ponzi (especially if you refer new users, similar to what OP is said to have done). If you need to know why this is bad reread my old posts; I say why there.

edit: also, why are you protecting mexxer-2 and lutpin?

I don't see that they have done anything wrong, however this is not the place to talk about it.

[Zeke2345]

Stock markets are a ponzi scheme,better neg rep everyone with a pension or a portfolio. Maybe just give every one in the forum neg rep and we can all relax and move on from this crusade.

[dooglus]

Dooglus was doing much more then telling people about his experience, he was actively telling people to invest and deposit into these scam sites and was getting paid large amounts to do so.

This is a lie and you know it.

I never told anyone to invest or deposit in either site. I said many times that I *didn't* know who was running them, and that I couldn't vouch for them. I also drew attention to the cheating at dicebitco.in and the missing cold wallet at dice.ninja before it was too late to withdraw, alerting people to the likelihood of them scamming. It's not suspicious that I was able to withdraw from the sites when I saw the clear signs that something was wrong. Anyone paying attention to the warning signs would have been able to do the same.

I wasn't paid anything by either site for promoting them other than when I wore the dicebitco.in signature for 1 week. I don't remember how much they paid per week but it certainly wasn't a "large amount".

[Stroto]

That source only talks about the small state of the USA and not the international bitcoin community

Which is why I updated with several sources from official websites of several countries. I am obviously not going to source every single country this way; you can easily find this information yourself. I also mentioned that participation in such schemes may differ from country to country.

So the question arises, if members give people negative trust because in their jurisdiction it is illegal to participate in a Ponzi, shouldn't we give everyone negative trust because in some jurisdictions it is illegal to trade in bitcoin in general?

I knew someone was going to bring this up.
This is BitcoinTalk. If someone visits this site where Bitcoin is prohibited, they cannot try to claim innocence due to the glaringly obvious title. However, someone new to this forum/Bitcoin in general may see "Get ##% back on your Bitcoin every hour - ReallyLegitInvestments" and be interested. Nothing from this gives the impression that such a service is prohibited, making it very easy for someone naive and inexperienced enough to take advantage of this offer and possibly be scammed.
People should do their own research on things that they invest in, but they don't. This is why the trust system was implemented - so other people can research and report on services and give their impressions.

Well when I replied to your post before you extended that it just said "it IS illegal" while it is "it MIGHT be illegal depending on your location. See my first post below yours. I know enough about that to know it is not easy to say it IS illegal.

I know this is bitcointalk   So they read the title and not the glaringly obvious warning of the subforum wherein the schemes are placed?

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

How do you know that if they found a link on google, opened the lalala.ponzi page, clicked on "forum" and get redirected here (what we have seen a lot). Did they even saw it is bitcointalk and not being blindsided by the BTCBTCBTC in their eyes that made them miss the said warning?

And you say it again:

Nothing from this gives the impression that such a service is prohibited

It might be prohibited for them, no way to be sure it is prohibited for them.
Exactly the same with bitcoin though maybe they can't deny they know it is bitcoin but they sure can deny knowing the law on it pretending being young and uneducated ("someone naive and inexperienced")  

it is a thin line when you project local jurisdiction on an international thing.

And yeah it is a lame thing giving someone negative trust because he is using bitcoin on a bitcoinforum, I agree, it is just as lame as giving noobs negative trust for burning their fingers.

[Zeke2345]

Dooglus was doing much more then telling people about his experience, he was actively telling people to invest and deposit into these scam sites and was getting paid large amounts to do so.

This is a lie and you know it.

I never told anyone to invest or deposit in either site. I said many times that I *didn't* know who was running them, and that I couldn't vouch for them. I also drew attention to the cheating at dicebitco.in and the missing cold wallet at dice.ninja before it was too late to withdraw, alerting people to the likelihood of them scamming. It's not suspicious that I was able to withdraw from the sites when I saw the clear signs that something was wrong. Anyone paying attention to the warning signs would have been able to do the same.

I wasn't paid anything by either site for promoting them other than when I wore the dicebitco.in signature for 1 week. I don't remember how much they paid per week but it certainly wasn't a "large amount".

Just to prove the issue with the way things are going...

Can you prove you where not involved? Are the accusations only going to be extended to certain people
Just a joke but you can see that the logic is faulty if they do not neg rep you without you providing evidence.

[dooglus]

Just to prove the issue with the way things are going...

Can you prove you where not involved? Are the accusations only going to be extended to certain people
Just a joke but you can see that the logic is faulty if they do not neg rep you without you providing evidence.

I think it's quite different.

I made it known that I had played at what I believed to be good dice sites. When I became suspicious that things were wrong, I posted about that too.

That's quite different from posting positive reports about ponzi schemes. Everyone knows the ponzi scheme is a scam and that it will eventually stop paying out, and so it is bad form to make positive posts about it, knowing full well that it is a scam.

[whywefight]

Last last time I checked, ponzis were illegal to operate and invest in. It's your fault you broke the law : You did it off your own free will.

Where in the world are ponzis illegal to invest in? Where did you hear this? I am intrigued and want to know more

here you go http://lmgtfy.com/?q=are+ponzis+illegal ... i cant belive ppl argue about it but dont have a clue...

[tspacepilot]

Just to prove the issue with the way things are going...

Can you prove you where not involved? Are the accusations only going to be extended to certain people
Just a joke but you can see that the logic is faulty if they do not neg rep you without you providing evidence.

I think it's quite different.

I made it known that I had played at what I believed to be good dice sites. When I became suspicious that things were wrong, I posted about that too.

That's quite different from posting positive reports about ponzi schemes. Everyone knows the ponzi scheme is a scam and that it will eventually stop paying out, and so it is bad form to make positive posts about it, knowing full well that it is a scam.

And if anyone doesn't know, it should be said that Quickseller has been trolling dooglus on this forum by repeating his lies again and again whenever he can.  It's his style.  Once QS decides to hate you, he will concoct any convoluted stories he can and repeat them again and again (often using many different accounts) in order to try to damage your reputation.  He used to be so successful at this that people were actually promoting him to default trust and even trusting him with increasingly large amounts of money.  Thankfully, QS' tactics and trustworthiness were revealed when he basically had a public meltdown on the last 10 or so pages of this thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.0

I'm just saying this here and now because it's important to call him out when he does this.  Every time one of the people he's attacking says something anywhere, he'll do his best to twist it into an attack onto that person's reputation.  dooglus should be able to offer an opinion on this thread without QS repeating his lies about dooglus,  but since he gets away with that, I feel the need to draw attention to the fact that it's a baseless ad hominem by a guy who spends waaay too much time repeating lies on this forum.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

Where is illegal to invest in? Has anyone ever been arrested for investing? Not running the ponzi, investing

Ponzis and Pyramids are illegal full stop. If I am a part of a mafia crew, I'm not above the law because I didn't kill anyone.

abuse is defined as : use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.

its literally the first thing that came up when i googled it

Trust abuse isn't defined in the same way as abuse on this forum. I'll see if I can find what theymos considers abuse somewhere; I'm sure he posted about it before.

Also, are you implying that I have something against OP because he is on DT?
I literally found out that he has on DT just minutes ago

No, I'm implying that you have something against the person that left him negative trust by the way you commonly post things similar to this:

Yes OP, the self appointed police made new forum laws a few hours ago

I'm guessing that you have some sort of thing against users such as cryptodevil, mexxer and Lutpin who leave trust that you do not see as appropriate (despite being given good reasoning several times).

That source only talks about the small state of the USA and not the international bitcoin community

Which is why I updated with several sources from official websites of several countries. I am obviously not going to source every single country this way; you can easily find this information yourself. I also mentioned that participation in such schemes may differ from country to country.

So the question arises, if members give people negative trust because in their jurisdiction it is illegal to participate in a Ponzi, shouldn't we give everyone negative trust because in some jurisdictions it is illegal to trade in bitcoin in general?

I knew someone was going to bring this up.
This is BitcoinTalk. If someone visits this site where Bitcoin is prohibited, they cannot try to claim innocence due to the glaringly obvious title. However, someone new to this forum/Bitcoin in general may see "Get ##% back on your Bitcoin every hour - ReallyLegitInvestments" and be interested. Nothing from this gives the impression that such a service is prohibited, making it very easy for someone naive and inexperienced enough to take advantage of this offer and possibly be scammed.
People should do their own research on things that they invest in, but they don't. This is why the trust system was implemented - so other people can research and report on services and give their impressions.

I will ask you this for the third or  fourth time, is investing in a ponzi illegal in your country? Not promoting, investing

please just give me a straight yes or no answer

[Zeke2345]

This is why I think there needs to be double check before we throw accusations around on the membership. Its a corrosive element to be around or involved in when every one is hunting out the next possible perp to take down. If you come across it fine,but to go seeking it out seems like something else is in play. If its power which I kind of think it is about,then earn it the right way and not through others.

I was not taking a shot at dooglus is just happened that he was in this thread or another thread saying these guys where ok to do these negative ratings on people and I thought it was a good spot to try on the shoe. Sent him a pm right after stating it was nothing personal as well,because I am really to lazy to know all the history. Doesnt mean I have not gone back and read every post by some of these guys to see where this issue turned its head.
Also wanting to know where some of the brown nosers come from that keep echoing the agenda.

Be as honest as I can be here and it may be my thinking is off. This to me is what happens with those mall security guys,they always wanted to be cops and they harass kids to no end because they get a jolt of what could be or they missed. This feels the same way but I believe it has more to do with making a name for ones self then making the forum better. How did they get into the trust in the first place? It was by doing this,so of course they are going to increase the issue to get more power.
If its not this,then I have a real problem with their moral judgement of people they deem less then upstanding. I will be around to make sure its known that not every one agrees with the antics,no matter how ineffective or effective they may be.

Ok my bit said,give it to me!

Sorry dooglus for using you as a example,was just so ripe a tomato to pick.

[whywefight]

Guys for months this drama is not about qs/vod/doog/tsp/DT1/putusallname here, leave it this way.

Just face it:

- We owned acc gens
- we brought down the number of threads for hacked/cracked shit
- we are going after gc scammer
- we are targeting ponzis and hyips
- we have a greater number of people in the lending section

Yeah maybe some people you dont like joined our efforts, we dont care about it. You had your chance, you failed.

Guess what, we have more stuff upcoming. This isnt about your longterm biased relations.

Just watch it, you can go on hating each other when we are done. No hard feelings, we still like you

[Your Point Is Invalid]

Guys for months this drama is not about qs/vod/doog/tsp/DT1/putusallname here, leave it this way.

Just face it:

- We owned acc gens
- we brought down the number of threads for hacked/cracked shit
- we are going after gc scammer
- we are targeting ponzis and hyips
- we have a greater number of people in the lending section

Yeah maybe some people you dont like joined our efforts, we dont care about it. You had your chance, you failed.

Guess what, we have more stuff upcoming. This isnt about your longterm biased relations.

Just watch it, you can go on hating each other when we are done. No hard feelings, we still like you

What are you talking about? the hateleague?

Do you honestly think that tagging those that invest in ponzi schemes will stop people from making them?
Also, how does investing in a ponzi make someone a scammer?

[whywefight]

Guys for months this drama is not about qs/vod/doog/tsp/DT1/putusallname here, leave it this way.

Just face it:

- We owned acc gens
- we brought down the number of threads for hacked/cracked shit
- we are going after gc scammer
- we are targeting ponzis and hyips
- we have a greater number of people in the lending section

Yeah maybe some people you dont like joined our efforts, we dont care about it. You had your chance, you failed.

Guess what, we have more stuff upcoming. This isnt about your longterm biased relations.

Just watch it, you can go on hating each other when we are done. No hard feelings, we still like you

What are you talking about? the hateleague?

Do you honestly think that tagging those that invest in ponzi schemes will stop people from making them?
Also, how does investing in a ponzi make someone a scammer?

There is a link in my sig written  in red letters. It contains a q&a. If you dont understand it or dont agree with it leave me a post there. After days you dont get it. You can call me member of the brony pony mirical wonderland gang if you like it better.

I would have sticked to that name just to piss people off but tbh i am busy with doing something against all that crap around here, so i just dont care.

[Zeke2345]

Guys for months this drama is not about qs/vod/doog/tsp/DT1/putusallname here, leave it this way.

Just face it:

- We owned acc gens
- we brought down the number of threads for hacked/cracked shit
- we are going after gc scammer
- we are targeting ponzis and hyips
- we have a greater number of people in the lending section

Yeah maybe some people you dont like joined our efforts, we dont care about it. You had your chance, you failed.

Guess what, we have more stuff upcoming. This isnt about your longterm biased relations.

Just watch it, you can go on hating each other when we are done. No hard feelings, we still like you

What are you talking about? the hateleague?

Do you honestly think that tagging those that invest in ponzi schemes will stop people from making them?
Also, how does investing in a ponzi make someone a scammer?

There is a link in my sig written  in red letters. It contains a q&a. If you dont understand it or dont agree with it leave me a post there. After days you dont get it. You can call me member of the brony pony mirical wonderland gang if you like it better.

I would have sticked to that name just to piss people off but tbh i am busy with doing something against all that crap around here, so i just dont care.

Are you trolling or you really have this big of a ego?
You want to be taken seriously it might help if you stop patting yourself on the back and see how you are toxic to the environment.
Forums are about discussion and when people act like dictators, we have to discuss it.

[Heutenamos]

It is not a safety anymore ,The are just backing up.

I will ask you this for the third or  fourth time, is investing in a ponzi illegal in your country? Not promoting, investing

No No No & No , How is that even a question ?

[cryptodevil]

Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:

1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.

2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.

3. Posting of your participation in any form in their threads is UNDENIABLE PROOF that you don't give a shit about other users being ripped off.


Which part of point 3 describes anything other than somebody who is PROVEN THROUGH THEIR OWN ACTIONS to be untrustworthy.

Ergo, you are marked as such so that anybody dealing with you in future understands the type of person you are.


Seriously, fuck all your other whining bullshit, dismantle point 3 with reasoned argument and I will concede. Otherwise shut the fuck up.

[MontyOnTheRun]

Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:

1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.

2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.

3. Posting of your participation in any form in their threads is UNDENIABLE PROOF that you don't give a shit about other users being ripped off.


Which part of point 3 describes anything other than somebody who is PROVEN THROUGH THEIR OWN ACTIONS to be untrustworthy.

Ergo, you are marked as such so that anybody dealing with you in future understands the type of person you are.


Seriously, fuck all your other whining bullshit, dismantle point 3 with reasoned argument and I will concede. Otherwise shut the fuck up.

Oh look it's MR Big Red Letters with the little Police Shield...

1. The issue is that people are leaving negative feedback for people posting their experience on Ponzi sites and if their experience is positive then they get a negative trust rating. The Ponzi sites are in the gambling section, there is a big warning saying you're an idiot if you invest money but self appointed forum members are singling out other members for posting their positive experience. The heavy handed arrogance of the self appointed forum police laying down the negative feedback is what really grates. As for you Cryptodevil you been going in the Coin Generator thread since almost the beginning screaming 'Scam' in your big attention grabbing font - a gambling site isn't a scam unless the owner decides to run with all the invested money.

2. Just like ALL forms of gambling both traditional, stock market, currency trading and Ponzi the profit you seek is gained from other losses - the bookmakers and casinos don't give you their money they give you the money that others have lost. The only time money is stolen in a Ponzi is when the owner decides to run with all money invested and that makes the owner a scammer not anyone who gambled that they would make money. If a Ponzi legitimately fails due to lack of new investors than the people who got in first and gambled that the site would last long enough to recoup their investment win the game. If a casino goes bust and you are holding their chips it doesn't make everyone who made money in the casino a scammer who has stolen from you. If the casino owner decides to run with the money they are the scammer. The problem is that some ponzis are purely designed to steal money from investors, while others are made to make some cash and they die out rather than be shut down mid round by the owner. If the owner decides to skim off enough money to cover their operation costs and pay them for their time this the House Edge that is their right and fair play to them - just like traditional gambling owners - http://casinogambling.about.com/od/oddsandends/a/houseedge.htm. So just to repeat because I know you find this bit hard to understand Users who make a profit from Ponzis aren't stealing from other users, they have just won the gamble, users who make a lost have just lost the gamble. This does not make it a scam or stealing. Users are not in a position to steal from each other only the site owner has that power.

3. This is wrong. If the site owner decides to scam and continues to run the Ponzi or a new one to sucker new investors and you don't raise a scam accusation thread and constantly shout scam then that is proof that you don't give a shit about other users being ripped off - which is what I did when Dualbitcoin stole from almost everyone and was hounded off the forum after stealing about $100 from people (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1369737.msg13936570#msg13936570). You'll see in that thread the supportive actions of James.Lent who is another member of your self appointed forum police. Participation in a Ponzi thread does not make you untrustworthy as you are simply gambling on whether you are going to win or not, making positive posts about your experience (if it is positive) isn't being a shill or trying to lure other people into the scheme and isn't dishonest - it's more akin to marketing to try to keep the game paying out for as many people as possible not just yourself, because if you've had a positive experience you are more likely to reinvest your profits just like with all gambling. It is no difference to your mate who bets on the horses or who likes casinos telling about the massive win he had at the weekend.

If you think this is undeniable proof of not giving a shit and untrustworthy behaviour then I fully expect you and the rest of the Ponzi police to be going round to all the threads which contain gambling in all forms including trading, and everyone who's signature contains a gambling site signature campaign advert and negatively feedback on every single person promoting those schemes too otherwise you are just as culpable as me, except I'm not so arrogant to assume the role you have given yourself as the last bastion to protect people from gambling even though that is the choice they have made themselves.

I look forward to you conceding as point 3 has been dismantled with reasoned argument, however I fully expect more big red font high handedness and circle jerking.