Someone give you negative trust for participating in a PONZI?

[bargainbin]

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.

You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct?
Or did you think dice websit operators are secretly manufacturing widgets & passing the profits on to the gamblers?

Now I *know* you ain't so dumb, this is just playing dumb.

If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you don't depend on the players after you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit.

Next!

Where do you suppose dice sites get their money, if not from other players, what do you suppose the business model is?
Explain?

Every gambling site has a bank to start with you dumbass. For those who cant afford having a bank, they incorporate Moneypot. Since you dont even know that, might as well just stfu and sit by the side.

Most Ponzis have a bankroll to start with, even if it's only to start a website & bootstrap the Ponzi.
Just like a dice site -- the initial bankroll is replenished & grows from the players' money. Duh.
You don't think the dice site starts with a bankroll & just keeps on giving it away, do you?
BTW, try to abstain from words like "dumbass" when you talk to your betters.
Learn some fucking manners, faggot.

[1713578675]

1713578675

[1713578675]

1713578675

[dooglus]

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

You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct?

No, it isn't. Most gambling doesn't involve deception. Ponzi scams *do*.

Ponzi scams promise their victims that they will make a profit. It's a lie, because not everyone can make a profit. Those who don't make a profit are defrauded.

Dice sites make it clear that they are offering a game of chance. They show the odds up front. "You have a 49.5% chance of doubling your money; there is a 1% house edge". Players know they might lose. Nobody's surprised when they lose a coin toss.

If you can't see the difference between these two (basically: Ponzi scams are inherently dishonest, Dice sites aren't) then I don't know how to help you.

[Zeke2345]

The issue is breaking down how far are we going to take this and that's what has me and I suspect others worried.
Since it is not clearly defined and I see some want to go at this like a religious crusade,its troubling. Not discounting that there are those that really do want to alter the forum but the issues seems to be spreading out. It either needs to be defined or it will become a joke in the end as you eventually have people going all over the place.
After a well we are just trolling each other and lets face it,some of us enjoy that aspect as well.

[bitbollo]

Had enough of the self appointed

"Scam Police"

The ones who believe themselves to have the power to decide where you invest/gamble YOUR OWN MONEY

Handing out negative trust to members who have done nothing wrong

Find them, post their name and link to their profile

They give out negative trust WITHOUT the right to do so

Lets give them negative trust FOR a reason

How much money will these "people" cost innocent members before it's enough?

I myself will more than likely be kicked from the Betcoin sig campaign simply because what I do
with my own money does not please some self appointed delusional crusader. This is why I have started this thread,
in plain English, no one fucks with me and walks away without something to remember the encounter by.

Now let me make this clear it's not the "people" that post "Scam" in every thread that I am after,
it's the ones who tag members with negative trust or the ones who threaten to do so that I want. But I you find
someone making lists or false accusations, that is also still much worse than simply participating.

Remember it's your money to do with as you please.
Being a participant is your right and you should NOT be punished for it

Lets start solving this problem together and maybe just maybe we can get the trust system back to actually meaning something.

everyone post and support a ponzi site (a scam site by definition!) well it deserve a negative trust because it's a scam support!
And we (all users) can't know if a "proof of payments" is fake, so also who post, give a "support" to a sure scam.

THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?
No I think no, because if I talk with a "normal people" can't NEVER trust in a site create to scam from the basic!
baaa you can invest with your money but don't "share" or suggest, because it's a stupid action for all users!

[bargainbin]

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

You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct?

No, it isn't. Most gambling doesn't involve deception. Ponzi scams *do*.

Ponzi scams promise their victims that they will make a profit. It's a lie, because not everyone can make a profit. Those who don't make a profit are defrauded.

Dice sites make it clear that they are offering a game of chance. They show the odds up front. "You have a 49.5% chance of doubling your money; there is a 1% house edge". Players know they might lose. Nobody's surprised when they lose a coin toss.

If you can't see the difference between these two (basically: Ponzi scams are inherently dishonest, Dice sites aren't) then I don't know how to help you.

>Most gambling doesn't involve deception. Ponzi scams *do*.
Ponzi *scams* do, but so do scam gambling sites. We aren't talking about those -- we're talking about Ponzis which clearly state exactly what they are.
See?

[cryptodevil]

If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you depend on the players before you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit.

No, now you guys are just making up dumb excuses. Thats a gambler's fallacy that any of your previous rolls, or anyone's for that matter, have an effect on your upcoming rolls.

Does the sequence of events matter? In other words, does it matter that my winnings come directly from the person who gambles after I do? If they come from the guy who gambled before me, that makes it OK?

Of course the sequence of events matters!

If you log in to a Dice site, make a deposit of BTC and roll, you have no idea whether the wins/losses of the people before you will mean you will find yourself fortunate enough to be joining in at the best time in the algorithm or the worst. Your wins and losses are not knowingly dictated by the players before you, although they are a factor, the players before you have no way of knowing how their playing will affect your playing.

If you join a Ponzi and send money in, you then have to seek out other people and convince them to send money in so that you don't end up being the user who doesn't get paid. The purpose of joining the scheme is to *not* be the mug who doesn't profit, so you have to post encouraging words in their threads to rustle up some other people who, through your post, will be encouraged enough to send in their money, resulting in some of their money being shared with you.

Your profit comes, not from a provably-fair algorithm unaffected by other players but, instead, a mathematically unsustainable process of finding other people to take the fall for you.

[bargainbin]

< >THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?

The forum should not. Nor should it support illegal gambling (yeah, it's illegal in US, where theymos' at). And yet, here we are...

[bargainbin]

If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you depend on the players before you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit.

No, now you guys are just making up dumb excuses. Thats a gambler's fallacy that any of your previous rolls, or anyone's for that matter, have an effect on your upcoming rolls.

Does the sequence of events matter? In other words, does it matter that my winnings come directly from the person who gambles after I do? If they come from the guy who gambled before me, that makes it OK?

Of course the sequence of events matters!

If you log in to a Dice site, make a deposit of BTC and roll, you have no idea whether the wins/losses of the people before you will mean you will find yourself fortunate enough to be joining in at the best time in the algorithm or the worst. Your wins and losses are not knowingly dictated by the players before you, although they are a factor, the players before you have no way of knowing how their playing will affect your playing.

If you join a Ponzi and send money in, you then have to seek out other people and convince them to send money in so that you don't end up being the user who doesn't get paid. The purpose of joining the scheme is to *not* be the mug who doesn't profit, so you have to post encouraging words in their threads to rustle up some other people who, through your post, will be encouraged enough to send in their money, resulting in some of their money being shared with you.

Your profit comes, not from a provably-fair algorithm unaffected by other players but, instead, a mathematically unsustainable process of finding other people to take the fall for you.

But now we're just talking about the rules of particular gambling games & best strategies to use. Some gambling games have a strong skill/social component (bluffing in poker comes to mind), others do not (dice).

Dice [in principle] is a game of pure chance, inevitably impoverishing its players (on the average) due to house edge. Some clearly like losing, see gambling addicts. No sane human being (who is not trying to launder money) would use a dice site, just like no sane human being would use a ponzi site. But we're not a mental health organization, we let people keep their kinks.

Ponzi is a more interesting game, that's all. Everyone but the operator will lose, on the average, but that's neither here nor there

[BSM]

IF I WILL DELETE MY PONZI THREAD WILL YOU DELETE YOUR FEEDBACK!!!? ANSWER! 

[cryptodevil]

IF I WILL DELETE MY PONZI THREAD WILL YOU DELETE YOUR FEEDBACK!!!? ANSWER! 

Yes and done.

[BSM]

I deleted my script threads and will not more offer something. Dear Police please delete your negative trust! I understand my offence and sorry!  Selling doubler scripts it is bad.

[Stroto]

Of course the sequence of events matters!

If you log in to a Dice site, make a deposit of BTC and roll, you have no idea whether the wins/losses of the people before you will mean you will find yourself fortunate enough to be joining in at the best time in the algorithm or the worst. Your wins and losses are not knowingly dictated by the players before you, although they are a factor, the players before you have no way of knowing how their playing will affect your playing.

If you join a Ponzi and send money in, you then have to seek out other people and convince them to send money in so that you don't end up being the user who doesn't get paid. The purpose of joining the scheme is to *not* be the mug who doesn't profit, so you have to post encouraging words in their threads to rustle up some other people who, through your post, will be encouraged enough to send in their money, resulting in some of their money being shared with you.

Your profit comes, not from a provably-fair algorithm unaffected by other players but, instead, a mathematically unsustainable process of finding other people to take the fall for you.

Not all Ponzi's work like that. Only the most simplistic stuff is like that. But as soon as there are different options in "profits" and timeframes in "turnovers" there is no need to get new investors, you can easily scoop up the coins already in a project as last player scammer  . Pretty standard in the HYIP world. Not so common here yet as most of the projects here are just the same lame script copy. However flexibit was an example of that. And one user from here showed exactly what I just said. that is just math.

Btw the process is unstable and that can be proven by math but it is not unstable because of math.

[Zeke2345]

< >THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?

The forum should not. Nor should it support illegal gambling (yeah, it's illegal in US, where theymos' at). And yet, here we are...

You have a chance to step out of the norms of society and establish a new way of thinking and you want to let the governement creep back in to the discussion of what is legal and what is not? Bitcoin is seen as illegal in many parts but here we are talking about it. This argument holds no water unless you believe bitcoin needs to conform and submit to backdoor technology where the government can look at every transaction. This is fair but do not presume we all come to bitcoin for the sole reason of profit.

[kingaltcoins]

Says the guy with a gambling signature :shakeshead:

It's ok to promote one form of gambling but not another? Guess if Ponzi's were allowed to do signature campaigns people's tune may change.

Hah! Lol! That is not a dice site in first place.
If you do not even click on my signature at least you can read what is written there right?

That is a SPORTS BETTING site.

So you are calling out a sports betting site a scam?

Good luck there IDIOT!
Go suck your ponzi bag!

[MontyOnTheRun]

Says the guy with a gambling signature :shakeshead:

It's ok to promote one form of gambling but not another? Guess if Ponzi's were allowed to do signature campaigns people's tune may change.

Hah! Lol! That is not a dice site in first place.
If you do not even click on my signature at least you can read what is written there right?

That is a SPORTS BETTING site.

So you are calling out a sports betting site a scam?

Good luck there IDIOT!
Go suck your ponzi bag!

Wow, I wonder if the other 632 posts you have made are as retarded as that one.

A) I made no mention of a dice site - I called it a gambling signature. Sports betting is gambling
B) I didn't mention scam once.
C) I implied that you were being a hypocrite calling out Ponzis while having a gambling signature.

In case you are too thick to understand even that

A) Duh
B) Dur
C) Ugh

[kingaltcoins]

Speaking utter nonsense...

Gambling and ponzis are not same. That is it!

I will not reply to your trolls anymore.

[Indianacoin]

@OP and his shills -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAi1005K71g

[MontyOnTheRun]

Speaking utter nonsense...

Gambling and ponzis are not same. That is it!

I will not reply to your trolls anymore.

Ah, a troll accusation... the ultimate internet put down.

The only debating you guys seem to be able to do is mass-debating each other in a giant 'hehehe I gave that guy a negative feedback hurhurhur' circle jerk

Gambling and Ponzi are exactly the same - you are betting on a particular outcome to try and make a profit.

[Zeke2345]

Looks like a break down in semantics but I think a ponzi scheme can be seen as a gamble.

Gamble:
: to risk losing (something valuable or important) in order to do or achieve something


If I invest in a ponzi scheme I am risking that I will get money back,risk vs. reward!
But I hate breaking this down because ponzi schemes are more clear cut on the taking advantage of people.
I am not putting people through the ringer with negative ratings over this so I can choose to be passive in the relationship of the words.
Think if you are going after ponzi schemes the logic extends to gambling as well. But thats splitting hairs.

My issue stays the same. If you choose to pass the warning on the subforum,its all on you after that point. No need to waste time chasing down ghosts that are just going to reappear in a weeks time.

**Edit***
Negative ratings also keep people out of signature campaigns,so this is not just a warning to other members. It has a stigma.

[minifrij]

Sorry for being late.

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

Probably not, no, but I expect it would depend on the circumstances. Regardless, this is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

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

Noobs miss the bright red "Warning: Trade with extreme caution!" under a user's name several times, why would they read a note in a subforum?
Though assuming that everyone read everything they should, there's still a few problems. The first being language barriers; not everyone speaks English and not everyone may understand what that message means.
The second being human nature. People tend to believe things differently should it affect them positively. For some people a scheme they invest in could promise to kill a child per investment, though their own greed will have them invest for personal gain anyway.
Lastly, if people like OP were to post on threads saying how legitimate the promoted service is, do you not think this would lower/nullify the warning given by the forum?

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?

Then there is nothing we can do against that apart from put it in obnoxious bold red lettering, which isn't going to happen. I'm sure that they would read the posts in the thread though, so once again people like OP making the service seem legitimate doesn't help.

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")  

They can, yes. However, afaik claiming that you didn't know a law existed doesn't then make that law not be applied to you. Regardless, as said above, the legality of Ponzis is not what the problem here is (and is likely an issue for another topic/board).

And yeah it is a lame thing giving someone negative trust because he is using bitcoin on a bitcoinforum, I agree

The problem should this happen is not how 'uncool' it would be to leave everyone a negative, more that if that were to become the norm any users with a legitimate negative trust would be overlooked and could scam further.

it is just as lame as giving noobs negative trust for burning their fingers.

The topic here isn't about a noob getting a negative trust for investing in something he shouldn't. This topic is about a member who has been here for a long time trying to legitimize a service that he knows will become anything but.

Do you honestly think that tagging those that invest in ponzi schemes will stop people from making them?

That isn't the point in tagging them. The tag is to show other users that the person running the ponzi shouldn't be trusted with their money.

Also, how does investing in a ponzi make someone a scammer?

This isn't the point. OP didn't just invest in a ponzi, he promoted it to over 100 people. Please don't try and tell me that all of these 100 people know exactly what a ponzi is and how it works.

cryptodevil

This user is currently ignored.

Child.

Looks like a break down in semantics but I think a ponzi scheme can be seen as a gamble.

Yeah, Ponzis are a form of gambling. That's why they are to be posted in a subsection of the Gambling subforum.