HONEST BITCOIN: DOUBLE YOUR BITCOINS. YES IT IS A PONZI.

[Honestbit]

For all of you who are interested in participating and not hating, Honest Bitcoin is a ponzi system where earlier investors receive payouts worth twice their deposit from the deposits of later investors. Since no one has deposited yet, there's no risk in being the first person to try it.

[1715052721]

1715052721

[1715052721]

1715052721

[shefchenko17]

For all of you who are interested in participating and not hating, Honest Bitcoin is a ponzi system where earlier investors receive payouts worth twice their deposit from the deposits of later investors. Since no one has deposited yet, there's no risk in being the first person to try it.

I'm not hating or supporting...but how so? I mean since there a re no investor, and I invest and then nobody invests after me... ? I think I'm gonna lose it

[winspiral]

For all of you who are interested in participating and not hating, Honest Bitcoin is a ponzi system where earlier investors receive payouts worth twice their deposit from the deposits of later investors. Since no one has deposited yet, there's no risk in being the first person to try it.

I'm not hating or supporting...but how so? I mean since there a re no investor, and I invest and then nobody invests after me... ? I think I'm gonna lose it

At least then no many people will lose the investment...just you...[joke]

[Honestbit]

For all of you who are interested in participating and not hating, Honest Bitcoin is a ponzi system where earlier investors receive payouts worth twice their deposit from the deposits of later investors. Since no one has deposited yet, there's no risk in being the first person to try it.

I'm not hating or supporting...but how so? I mean since there a re no investor, and I invest and then nobody invests after me... ? I think I'm gonna lose it

Resets happen weekly (actually I am trying to figure out the best rhythm for resetting, there's a poll up top) so you will get your original deposit back by Wednesday. And if someone does invest after you, you'll make a profit. I won't take the 5% if there's only one person depositing. That would be just mean.

[shefchenko17]

For all of you who are interested in participating and not hating, Honest Bitcoin is a ponzi system where earlier investors receive payouts worth twice their deposit from the deposits of later investors. Since no one has deposited yet, there's no risk in being the first person to try it.

I'm not hating or supporting...but how so? I mean since there a re no investor, and I invest and then nobody invests after me... ? I think I'm gonna lose it

Resets happen weekly (actually I am trying to figure out the best rhythm for resetting, there's a poll up top) so you will get your original deposit back by Wednesday. And if someone does invest after you, you'll make a profit. I won't take the 5% if there's only one person depositing. That would be just mean.

yeah I get it. To be honest..I'd have already tried to invest here, but the name honest is...just hilarious

[Honestbit]

Would "100% that all participants would fully understand what they were sending money to bitcoi"  be better

[shefchenko17]

Would "100% that all participants would fully understand what they were sending money to bitcoi"  be better

no. but honest in this sections is the worst name but I've lost a lot of BTC trying new and new HYIPS and another sh*t so.. I'll wait a bit

[Honestbit]

That's a perfectly logical choice. After all, there are no deposits in. On a side note, I wonder what happened to "This community action will not stop until the poisonous ponzi scamming threads are all dead."?

[opmac]

Add a new choice to the poll

Take the piece of shit off the interent

Bet that will garner the most votes. Humor us and add it


IGNORE THIS THREAD

SAVE YOUR BTC

SUPPORT CRYPTO DON'T DESTROY IT!!!

[Honestbit]

I'll add it if you answer my questions

[cryptodevil]

I don't think it's fair to require that 100% of customers fully understand the terms up front. You can't expect 100% of people to understand anything at all, since there exist some incredibly unintelligent people.

But as I said previously, a person sending money to a casino site who doesn't understand the odds will have the exact same chance of their bet winning or losing as an experienced gambler placing the same bet. People who don't understand Ponzis don't necessarily have to be stupid, they may have had google translate fail on them and be unaware that their late-to-the-queue deposit it almost bound to result in them being the one who loses their funds.

The quote about it being illegal to run a business where the income is only from new recruits doesn't apply I think. Ponzi schemes aren't generally funded by referrals, and many players player repeatedly. Obviously if nobody was ever "recruited" into playing a Ponzi then there would be no business, but the same could be said about any business. If a store never "recruited" any customers they wouldn't make any sales. That's not what the law is talking about. It's talking about schemes where you have to buy a membership to get involved.

This is an incorrect assessment of the legal condition of a Ponzi scheme.

From the Encyclopedia of Fraud:

“A Ponzi scheme and an illegal pyramid scheme both use new investors’ money to pay earlier investors. The difference between the two lies in the way each scheme is promoted. Illegal pyramids generate revenue by continually recruiting new members. The promoters may offer merchandise or services for sale—or may not—but the only significant revenues come from recruitment. Though a pyramid-style compensation plan is not illegal, it is illegal to run a business in which recruiting new people generates all of the funds.”

They are not referring to members of that Ponzi being paid referrals for 'recruiting' new participants, they mean the operators of the scheme need new people to join and send their money in. An 'honest' Ponzi scheme generates all of its funds through it convincing new people to send it money, even if it is telling them exactly what it is, the above makes it perfectly clear that it is illegal to run a business which operates that way.

[ppebooks]

seeing as it cannot be established 100% that all participants would fully understand what they were sending money to, it would still be theft to take their coins and leave them with a loss.

Can you name a bitcoin service where people are 100% sure what they are sending money to?

there are indeed some legit dealers...

[winspiral]

seeing as it cannot be established 100% that all participants would fully understand what they were sending money to, it would still be theft to take their coins and leave them with a loss.

Can you name a bitcoin service where people are 100% sure what they are sending money to?

there are indeed some legit dealers...

so far I have always sent 100% of what I promised...often I have even sent more...
of course noboddy is sure...we can even not be sure that tomorrow we will awake...

[Honestbit]

I don't think it's fair to require that 100% of customers fully understand the terms up front. You can't expect 100% of people to understand anything at all, since there exist some incredibly unintelligent people.

But as I said previously, a person sending money to a casino site who doesn't understand the odds will have the exact same chance of their bet winning or losing as an experienced gambler placing the same bet. People who don't understand Ponzis don't necessarily have to be stupid, they may have had google translate fail on them and be unaware that their late-to-the-queue deposit it almost bound to result in them being the one who loses their funds.

If you legitimately feel the responsibility to ensure that non-English speakers understand the details of this system, I applaud you. However, your words have done nothing to forward your cause. If Google translate fails on my posts, what's not to say it won't fail on yours. Besides, your posts do not clarify why they could lose money, you simply post threats in your great red font. If you really wanted to help people who don't speak English, start a new thread and post in their language. By adding the Wikipedia links I have done more in this field than you have.

The quote about it being illegal to run a business where the income is only from new recruits doesn't apply I think. Ponzi schemes aren't generally funded by referrals, and many players player repeatedly. Obviously if nobody was ever "recruited" into playing a Ponzi then there would be no business, but the same could be said about any business. If a store never "recruited" any customers they wouldn't make any sales. That's not what the law is talking about. It's talking about schemes where you have to buy a membership to get involved.

This is an incorrect assessment of the legal condition of a Ponzi scheme.

From the Encyclopedia of Fraud:

“A Ponzi scheme and an illegal pyramid scheme both use new investors’ money to pay earlier investors. The difference between the two lies in the way each scheme is promoted. Illegal pyramids generate revenue by continually recruiting new members. The promoters may offer merchandise or services for sale—or may not—but the only significant revenues come from recruitment. Though a pyramid-style compensation plan is not illegal, it is illegal to run a business in which recruiting new people generates all of the funds.”

They are not referring to members of that Ponzi being paid referrals for 'recruiting' new participants, they mean the operators of the scheme need new people to join and send their money in. An 'honest' Ponzi scheme generates all of its funds through it convincing new people to send it money, even if it is telling them exactly what it is, the above makes it perfectly clear that it is illegal to run a business which operates that way.

Our interpretations disagree and are probably going to continue disagreeing indefinitely. You've made your point, this is my thread, so kindly go away.

[cryptodevil]

If you really wanted to help people who don't speak English, start a new thread and post in their language.

Big red text is usually recognised the world over as being a warning. I need not explain to them how a ponzi works, I need only post my warning in your thread to alert them to the dangers of the illegal ponzi you are promoting (you did say you are in the US, btw).

Our interpretations disagree and are probably going to continue disagreeing indefinitely.

It isn't my interpretation, it is the fucking law. Nowhere in the US is it legal to operate a scheme which relies on new participants sending money in so that earlier participants can be paid.

Denying the fact that you are attempting to promote and operate an illegal financial scheme in a country which specifically prohibits such does not permit you to continue as though it doesn't matter. Inviting people to send money to your scheme, having informed them that it is a Ponzi, an explicitly illegal operation in your jurisdiction, means that they are not participants, they are collaborators.

[Greenenergy]

Simple question for all the disbelievers: what actions can I take to convince you of my legitimacy?

You don't need any actions. You are admittedly hosting a ponzi, which is illegal.

I-L-L-E-G-A-L

By defenition,

"A Ponzi scheme and an illegal pyramid scheme both use new investors' money to pay earlier investors. The difference between the two lies in the way each scheme is promoted. Illegal pyramids generate revenue by continually recruiting new members."

I don't agree with you. I don't consider this as illegal. On the Internet, except robbery, nothing is illegal.

Simple question for all the disbelievers: what actions can I take to convince you of my legitimacy?

If in two months your site is still paying, I will consider you as legit.

[cryptodevil]

I don't agree with you. I don't consider this as illegal. On the Internet, except robbery, nothing is illegal.

Sure, yeah, sounds like you've got an awesome grasp of criminal law. Good luck with that.

[Honestbit]

If you really wanted to help people who don't speak English, start a new thread and post in their language.

Big red text is usually recognised the world over as being a warning. I need not explain to them how a ponzi works, I need only post my warning in your thread to alert them to the dangers of the illegal ponzi you are promoting (you did say you are in the US, btw).

You pretend you're looking out for their interests but you are as selfish as anyone you infatuated piece of excrement.

Our interpretations disagree and are probably going to continue disagreeing indefinitely.

It isn't my interpretation, it is the fucking law. Nowhere in the US is it legal to operate a scheme which relies on new participants sending money in so that earlier participants can be paid.

Denying the fact that you are attempting to promote and operate an illegal financial scheme in a country which specifically prohibits such does not permit you to continue as though it doesn't matter. Inviting people to send money to your scheme, having informed them that it is a Ponzi, an explicitly illegal operation in your jurisdiction, means that they are not participants, they are collaborators.

You want to take up dooglas on that?

[Honestbit]

Simple question for all the disbelievers: what actions can I take to convince you of my legitimacy?

You don't need any actions. You are admittedly hosting a ponzi, which is illegal.

I-L-L-E-G-A-L

By defenition,

"A Ponzi scheme and an illegal pyramid scheme both use new investors' money to pay earlier investors. The difference between the two lies in the way each scheme is promoted. Illegal pyramids generate revenue by continually recruiting new members."

I don't agree with you. I don't consider this as illegal. On the Internet, except robbery, nothing is illegal.

Simple question for all the disbelievers: what actions can I take to convince you of my legitimacy?

If in two months your site is still paying, I will consider you as legit.

It's a deal

[cryptodevil]

You pretend you're looking out for their interests but you are as selfish as anyone you infatuated piece of excrement.

aaaaaand there we have it. Gotta love a good reveal!

You want to take up dooglas on that?

See, here's the thing QS-Jr, or should we just go with QS? I've previously been accused of either being Dooglus or being a patsy for Dooglus but we do actually have differing views on some issues. He considers a Ponzi which operates as a fully-disclosed Ponzi as not being dishonest, I disagree and I have explained in detail why. He explained why he believed an 'Honest' Ponzi scheme operated by a US resident would not necessarily be illegal and not only do I disagree on that matter, I have explained why he is incorrect to believe so.

I am also more than able to source further citations if needed to more fully explain why it is illegal across the entire United States of America, where you already admit you reside, for anyone to operate a ponzi, be it promoted as such, or not. I have no reason to believe Dooglus would be grossly offended by being provided evidence which shows his belief to be mistaken.

But, then, the *whole* point of this tedious sock-puppet account exercise of yours was to try and dream up a way for you to create a Ponzi you knew Dooglus wouldn't necessarily oppose so that my tagging of its participants would, in your feverish imagination, set Dooglus and I against each other!!!!!!1!1!!!1!!! This would bring the whole DT system crashing to its knees etc. etc. and so forth.

It would be clever, if it weren't just so very very dumb.