TradeFortress is a scammer.

[dchapes]

So what if an IOU is involved in an exchange? I'm not going to have that IOU randomly substituted for something else because OpenCoin Inc places having a flawed system that somewhat works over not making me lose money.

And again you change topics and are back claiming IOUs are substituted randomly. A balance shifting between entities you've told the system are interchangeable is not randomly.. If you don't want your balances to shift, trust only one gateway. Which is the recommended use case.

[dchapes]

That's a bad analogy. If receiving bitcoin payments required people to post their private keys...

Then you don't understand the analogy. It's about misleading people to do something that you know is unwise.

But (and this is a separate point, you keep introducing separate points ala the Gish Gallop) it's true you can't make a non-XRP payment to someone unless they have indicated someone they trust to hold the funds. Just like I can't wire transfer someone money without knowing what bank they trust to receive the funds.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

So what if an IOU is involved in an exchange? I'm not going to have that IOU randomly substituted for something else because OpenCoin Inc places having a flawed system that somewhat works over not making me lose money.

And again you change topics and are back claiming IOUs are substituted randomly. A balance shifting between entities you've told the system are interchangeable is not randomly.. If you don't want your balances to shift, trust only one gateway. Which is the recommended use case.

IOUs are substituted randomly without your explicit approval. It's not like there's a popup saying, "Would you like to substitute 2 BTC from Bitstamp for 1 BTC from Alice?". Someone may trust two people both for 10 BTC, but they may prefer one person's IOUs over the other. Aka the ATM example I gave you a while ago. One type of IOUs may have a 0.01 BTC fee for redeeming.

In addition, trust is not binary. You can trust someone more than someone else. Ripple doesn't care.

That's a bad analogy. If receiving bitcoin payments required people to post their private keys...

Then you don't understand the analogy. It's about misleading people to do something that you know is unwise.

Misleading what? I gave them a ripple BTC. It may be unwise, but that's not scammy. If someone says, "hey, can you change [something] on my website, I'll pay you $500", I'd happily take upon it if it only took me a hour.

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum. Have fun using a system that won't exist in 5 years!

[bitaccumulation]

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum.

Who are you referring to?

I've been on Bitcointalk.org a year and three months longer than you have. 

[dchapes]

IOUs are substituted randomly without your explicit approval.

You approved it when you used the advanced trust feature. There is a bug/issue open to make the warning message even clearer.

Someone may trust two people both for 10 BTC, but they may prefer one person's IOUs over the other. Aka the ATM example I gave you a while ago. One type of IOUs may have a 0.01 BTC fee for redeeming.

In addition, trust is not binary. You can trust someone more than someone else. Ripple doesn't care.

Then you don't know Ripple as much as you claim to. The server supports trust quality levels to charge a fee for someone degrading your balance. Set the fee to near infinite if you like. Ripple is still in beta and the beta client doesn't expose these settings.

Then you don't understand the analogy. It's about misleading people to do something that you know is unwise.

Misleading what? I gave them a ripple BTC. It may be unwise, but that's not scammy.

You purposely targeted the newbie section to mislead people that didn't know anything about Ripple to make an advanced setting in Ripple that you full well knew was unwise to make. It's like misleading people open up their firewall or misleading people to reveal their private keys.

Have fun using a system that won't exist in 5 years!

LOL, that's what people said about bitcoin too. I've been using ripple for years and I'm sure I'll still be using it in five years.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

IOUs are substituted randomly without your explicit approval.

You approved it when you used the advanced trust feature. There is a bug/issue open to make the warning message even clearer.

Someone may trust two people both for 10 BTC, but they may prefer one person's IOUs over the other. Aka the ATM example I gave you a while ago. One type of IOUs may have a 0.01 BTC fee for redeeming.

In addition, trust is not binary. You can trust someone more than someone else. Ripple doesn't care.

Then you don't know Ripple as much as you claim to. The server supports trust quality levels to charge a fee for someone degrading your balance. Set the fee to near infinite if you like. Ripple is still in beta and the beta client doesn't expose these settings.

Then you don't understand the analogy. It's about misleading people to do something that you know is unwise.

Misleading what? I gave them a ripple BTC. It may be unwise, but that's not scammy.

You purposely targeted the newbie section to mislead people that didn't know anything about Ripple to make an advanced setting in Ripple that you full well knew was unwise to make. It's like misleading people open up their firewall or misleading people to reveal their private keys.

Have fun using a system that won't exist in 5 years!

LOL, that's what people said about bitcoin too. I've been using ripple for years and I'm sure I'll still be using it in five years.

> sending payments
> advanced setting

> closed source server features
> don't know ripple well because I can know what's in closed source software

I'm done.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum.

Who are you referring to?

I've been on Bitcointalk.org a year and three months longer than you have. 

Date Registered:    March 26, 2013, 01:04:07 PM

First post: coming here to promote Ripple

[dchapes]

You would not be getting my IOUs if you have not trusted me, you would have got the IOUs of someone who you trusted who trusted me's IOUs which are really being backed by my IOUs.

No! Not "backed by [your] IOUs" there is no such concept in Ripple. The IOU I get is backed by the trust I placed in the person/entity to which I extended trust. Unless they violate that trust I'm not effected. This is exactly what I explained previously and in detail.

[bitaccumulation]

I'm done.

Hopefully.  

The worst part about this whole ordeal is that you have a long posting history on Bitcointalk and the Newbie's you posted to most likely took that as a cue that you were reputable and that your "experiment" was leading them down a path where they wouldn't get hurt.  

[bitaccumulation]

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum.

Who are you referring to?

I've been on Bitcointalk.org a year and three months longer than you have. 

Date Registered:    March 26, 2013, 01:04:07 PM

First post: coming here to promote Ripple

Who are the "other drive by posters?"  As I said, I've been on Bitcointalk a year and three months before you were.

[dchapes]

Out of nowhere...

> sending payments
> advanced setting

> closed source server features
> don't know ripple well because I can know what's in closed source software

I'm done.

You should see: http://unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg
(I'd inline it but it's a bit big).

[ervalvola]

There are numerous differences with XRP/BTC, most importantly the fact that you still need trust to send XRP transactions

Whoa whoa whoa, stop there. Sending XRP from any ripple address to any other ripple address requires no trust. Unless you're going to claim it's the users trusting Ripple itself but that's no different from trusting bitcoin itself.

Seems that he rly doesn't understand ...
Other fake arguments, instead, are only purely rhetorical and didn't surprise me, they only demonstrate a sort of obsession against ripple which we shouldn't be interested in.

Although is very interesting to elaborate about Ripple and the false flaws he claims to find, i think that is more important here to understand the fraudulent nature of his original thread and how he exploited his reputation as a member of this forum putting in danger a lot of users.

I think that an analysis purified from the instrument (i.e. Ripple) could help to better understand the dynamics which are, precisely, independent from that instrument.

That's why i posted my question to him but, who knows why, he doesn't want to answer:

Just confirm if i'm right:

1) Did you warn people who trusted you that you weren't able to repay that "I owe you" with real bitcoins?
    NO

2) You encouraged people to withdraw those IOUs in a gateway?
    YES

3) Did you know that such a withdraw could have (and probably did) resulted in financial loss (even huge one) to another user who naively trusted you?
    YES
    [if not, you hadn't understand ripple and you weren't able to criticize it]

4) That Bitcoin you withdrawed to Bitstamp, was previously owned by you?
   NO, as you said

Sounds like an admission. Just to clarify: point (3) states that you've allowed the guys who understand the mechanism to steal money to the gullible.
I'd like to hear from you the answer of the last 2 questions:

5) Why did you choose to post that thread in the newbye section?

6) Why the thread was self-moderated?

MAy i add:

7) Do you are conscious that it could have ended with people losing much much more bitcoins?

8 ) Given that only 1.01 bitcoins were stolen, you consider what you call an "experiment", and i define a scam, succesfully?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

You're the people who don't actually understand how the ledger system requires you to trust the nodes that you get your information from, which are all OpenCoin Inc or OpenCoin Inc sponsored ones.

With bitcoin, you can verify everything yourself. It's like there being Blockchain.info and only blockchain.info - no full nodes like bitcoin-qt, and all the mining has being done by Satoshi.

[dchapes]

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum.

Who are you referring to?

I've been on Bitcointalk.org a year and three months longer than you have. 

Date Registered:    March 26, 2013, 01:04:07 PM

First post: coming here to promote Ripple

Presumably you're referring to me. I lurked here years ago but never got an account because of the density of loons here. I only got an account because I was referred to a Ripple question here and wanted to answer it.

But that's all irrelevant. It's an ad hominem attack and/or poising the well. Criticizing the speaker rather than the message/argument.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Anyways, I think I wasted enough of my time arguing with you and other drive by posters from the ripple forum.

Who are you referring to?

I've been on Bitcointalk.org a year and three months longer than you have.  

Date Registered:    March 26, 2013, 01:04:07 PM

First post: coming here to promote Ripple

Presumably you're referring to me. I lurked here years ago but never got an account because of the density of loons here. I only got an account because I was referred to a Ripple question here and wanted to answer it.

But that's all irrelevant. It's an ad hominem attack and/or poising the well. Criticizing the speaker rather than the message/argument.

Correct, I think you should also look at the thread title and see who started the derailing of a subject that has already ended by post 11.

[bitaccumulation]

You're the people who don't actually understand how the ledger system requires you to trust the nodes that you get your information from, which are all OpenCoin Inc or OpenCoin Inc sponsored ones.

With bitcoin, you can verify everything yourself. It's like there being Blockchain.info and only blockchain.info - no full nodes like bitcoin-qt, and all the mining has being done by Satoshi.

What does this have to do with you misrepresenting and misleading newbie's?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

You're the people who don't actually understand how the ledger system requires you to trust the nodes that you get your information from, which are all OpenCoin Inc or OpenCoin Inc sponsored ones.

With bitcoin, you can verify everything yourself. It's like there being Blockchain.info and only blockchain.info - no full nodes like bitcoin-qt, and all the mining has being done by Satoshi.

What does this have to do with you misrepresenting and misleading newbie's?

Glad to know that you (group) changed the criteria from "steal money" to "misrepresenting and misleading newbies".

I'm responding to someone saying sending XRPs does not require trust, which is factually incorrect.

[ervalvola]

I'm responding to someone saying sending XRPs does not require trust, which is factually incorrect.

Playing with the word trust ; ) another example of empty rhetoric

[mmeijeri]

it's true you can't make a non-XRP payment to someone unless they have indicated someone they trust to hold the funds. Just like I can't wire transfer someone money without knowing what bank they trust to receive the funds.

Extending your point: this is an important feature, not a bug. Without this feature, anyone could be saddled with TF's worthless IOUs rather than say Bitstamp IOUs or IOUs "issued" by friends and relatives.

[Raoul Duke]

I would not accept a BoA balance equal to a Citibank's balance if the nearest BoA atm is a hour's drive away compared to 5 minutes, for example.

This is why you're a douchebag.  

YOU don't have to accept BOA and Citibank equally.   But if you trust BOA - THEY trust Citibank - and thus you can end up with money from someone trusting Citibank.

Get it dumbass?  (probably not)

What Ripple does is let you TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for these trust relationships in a finer and more detailed way.   However, that's harder to do when a jerk-off like you is misleading people into thinking you're "going to send them BTC on Ripple" when they don't even understand what Ripple is.

You're a fucking scammer - you misled people to perpetrate a fraud. That's a fact.  Whether the moderators want to do the right thing or not is irrelevant.

geeeeez, if a forum troll can wreak such havoc then ripple doesn't seem to be that much of a system, does it?