Theymos: What the fuck is up with BFL and TradeFortress?

[webr3]

This is ridiculous.

TradeFortress has knowingly tried to scam 450 people out of up to 100 BTC each, whether he ultimately received it or not. He knows this, which is why he asked me, ONLY ME, to turn the trust to 0, because he knew he was the main agent facilitating, and responsible, for everything.

If it has exposed a flaw in ripple, one where there are no dates to when a debt is due, so be it, I'm sure this can be remedied quickly.

In the meantime, he has screwed me out of 10.15 BTC, and set up a scenario where he facilitates up to 445 more BTC getting taken from people. BTC he has given, promised to pay, and which he has asked to incur in debt with other people. He has now incurred some of it, he owes it.

You can argue over a technicality all you want, but what he has set up is morally wrong in every way, it is an elaborate scam, and who is to say it is not him who has withdrawn some of the BTC, or planned to withdraw some of it?

[1713901974]

1713901974

[1713901974]

1713901974

[Minor Miner]

This is ridiculous.
TradeFortress has knowingly tried to scam 450 people out of up to 100 BTC each, whether he ultimately received it or not. He knows this, which is why he asked me, ONLY ME, to turn the trust to 0, because he knew he was the main agent facilitating, and responsible, for everything.
If it has exposed a flaw in ripple, one where there are no dates to when a debt is due, so be it, I'm sure this can be remedied quickly.
In the meantime, he has screwed me out of 10.15 BTC, and set up a scenario where he facilitates up to 445 more BTC getting taken from people. BTC he has given, promised to pay, and which he has asked to incur in debt with other people. He has now incurred some of it, he owes it.
You can argue over a technicality all you want, but what he has set up is morally wrong in every way, it is an elaborate scam, and who is to say it is not him who has withdrawn some of the BTC, or planned to withdraw some of it?

Sounds like your accusation is against Ripple, not TF.   Perhaps you should apologize to him as you are basically saying that TF set up the rules of Ripple to cheat YOU.   Can you prove that TF was the creator of this Ripple and he did it just to cheat you?
Considering the USA has had over 20 million people not pay their contractual obligation on their HOME, risking becoming homeless, there is no way I would ever "trust" IOUs from people I do not know.

[webr3]

This is ridiculous.
TradeFortress has knowingly tried to scam 450 people out of up to 100 BTC each, whether he ultimately received it or not. He knows this, which is why he asked me, ONLY ME, to turn the trust to 0, because he knew he was the main agent facilitating, and responsible, for everything.
If it has exposed a flaw in ripple, one where there are no dates to when a debt is due, so be it, I'm sure this can be remedied quickly.
In the meantime, he has screwed me out of 10.15 BTC, and set up a scenario where he facilitates up to 445 more BTC getting taken from people. BTC he has given, promised to pay, and which he has asked to incur in debt with other people. He has now incurred some of it, he owes it.
You can argue over a technicality all you want, but what he has set up is morally wrong in every way, it is an elaborate scam, and who is to say it is not him who has withdrawn some of the BTC, or planned to withdraw some of it?

Sounds like your accusation is against Ripple, not TF.   Perhaps you should apologize to him as you are basically saying that TF set up the rules of Ripple to cheat YOU.   Can you prove that TF was the creator of this Ripple and he did it just to cheat you?
Considering the USA has had over 20 million people not pay their contractual obligation on their HOME, risking becoming homeless, there is no way I would ever "trust" IOUs from people I do not know.

This is nothing to do with ripple, and show's no flaw in it. It simply shows that you should be careful who you trust, always.

TradeFortress has asked for trust, and promised people money. He has incurred debt. He has a 100 BTC overdraft with many members of this forum, and he's cashed out over 10 BTC so far. This is money he owes.

TradeFortress is either trustworthy, or is not. So far, it seems he's one of the shadiest people I've ever met on the internet. He has facilitated nothing but his own demise.

TradeFortress, make good your promises, repay your debts, contact the people who issued trust to you and ask them to revoke it. What you have tried to do here is low and foolish.

[Matthew N. Wright]

This entire debate is the same as my Pirate bet where I didn't ask for escrow (because I was trying to prove a point about making bets without escrow and trusting strangers on the internet). I never accepted a penny from anyone and I still got instant scammer tagged and was held to actually paying people the balances of my prank.

The general consensus was that I "scammed expected value" or some whatnot. Despite feeling awful for others having made ignorant financial decisions based on that bet and having learned my lessons, you'd think this community would have learned it's lesson too. Instead, here we are again, except this time it seems Theymos is waiting on something (I'm honestly not sure what that is). I don't know what he's waiting on for BFL either.


Bottom line for community (a lesson I learned the hard way): Don't fuck with other people's money to "teach them lessons", despite your passionate crusade against stupidity.

Bottom line for mods: Stop having double standards for everything that happens on the forums. It's either okay to scam expected value (cheating), or it's not. Pick one and stick with it. </end thread>

[Mitzplik]

This thread is really interesting because this is what is going to happen when people start trusting their friends, who trust another layer of friends.

Lots of complaints, misunderstandings, etc

If the "feeling scammed" one would follow riplle rules, he would pay someone with this TF IOU, isnt it right?

The ripple IOUs are like dateless checks. If you have one from wells fargo its good, if you have TF check (in this case) it would be nothing at all!!,!

Trade Fortress would be a scammer if he tried to deny the debt.
But he doesnt, he openly assumes the debt through an IOU with no redemption date, rsrsrs

This was an incredible move, no Scam!

Ripple slogan suggestion: ripple, you trust, you learn

[Este Nuno]

Actually, because losing $1100+ is probably not what you want to see happen, I've transferred your 10.15 Bitstamp BTCs.

Give me an address to send your 10.15 back, because right now if you check your Ripple wallet you shouldn't have any bitstamp IOUs

This is exactly what I wanted to see happen, and exactly what was supposed to happen.

I trusted you for 100 BTC. You have withdrawn 10.15 BTC to blockchain. You owe me 10.15 BTC. We have successfully demonstrated how ripple works.

You of course owe me 10.15 BTC, and you can pay me that back through ripple at any point, I'd prefer it in ripple, rather than blockchain.

Ripple just models real life, only trust people or entities you view as trustworthy. I decided to trust you, and I'm sure you'll want to keep your trust and reputation over the coming weeks and months.

Still unsure what your point is?

I can't believe you just risked 10 bitcoins to prove your point, lol. Quite a pair on you.

[escrow.ms]

Well I still don't understand what's going on with Ripple BTC.

I have gotten 4 BTC or IOU from tradefortress but I don't use bitstamp. So what should i do now?

PS: I know they are not real btc i only want to know about this thing.

And you owe 445+ other people 1 BTC each. You willingly and publicly opted in to this, you set it all up, now you pay the price.

Theymos, Mods, John K, I request the scammer tag. TradeFortress owes me 10.15 BTC, and has also promised 445 other users 1 BTC each.

[uMMcQxCWELNzkt]

This entire debate is the same as my Pirate bet where I didn't ask for escrow (because I was trying to prove a point about making bets without escrow and trusting strangers on the internet). I never accepted a penny from anyone and I still got instant scammer tagged and was held to actually paying people the balances of my prank.

The general consensus was that I "scammed expected value" or some whatnot. Despite feeling awful for others having made ignorant financial decisions based on that bet and having learned my lessons, you'd think this community would have learned it's lesson too. Instead, here we are again, except this time it seems Theymos is waiting on something (I'm honestly not sure what that is). I don't know what he's waiting on for BFL either.


Bottom line for community (a lesson I learned the hard way): Don't fuck with other people's money to "teach them lessons", despite your passionate crusade against stupidity.

Bottom line for mods: Stop having double standards for everything that happens on the forums. It's either okay to scam expected value (cheating), or it's not. Pick one and stick with it. </end thread>

Most scams derive from the stupidity of the victim, does that make it legitimate practice to "prank" or "teach" the (naive or inexperienced) stupid person a lesson? On a slightly unrelated note, I am glad I did not accept those ASIC shares now as it is not good business to involve yourself with people whol like to fuck about with your money. Ironically the same reason I want out of the FIAT system. 

[Matthew N. Wright]

Most scams derive from the stupidity of the victim, does that make it legitimate practice to "prank" or "teach" the (naive or inexperienced) stupid person a lesson?

I can't tell if you read what I said or not, but you realize that was also my point? What I did was stupid and I'm not interested in every doing something like that again. I learned a lesson. The point of this thread is, "is TradeFortress going to learn his?" and "Is Theymos going to pick and choose when to have standards for bans and scammer tags?"

On a slightly unrelated note, I am glad I did not accept those ASIC shares now as it is not good business to involve yourself with people whol like to fuck about with your money.

Not sure what to say to this as I think it was said in misunderstanding of what is going on..

[uMMcQxCWELNzkt]

Most scams derive from the stupidity of the victim, does that make it legitimate practice to "prank" or "teach" the (naive or inexperienced) stupid person a lesson?

I can't tell if you read what I said or not, but you realize that was also my point? What I did was stupid and I'm not interested in every doing something like that again. I learned a lesson. The point of this thread is, "is TradeFortress going to learn his?" and "Is Theymos going to pick and choose when to have standards for bans and scammer tags?"

On a slightly unrelated note, I am glad I did not accept those ASIC shares now as it is not good business to involve yourself with people whol like to fuck about with your money.

Not sure what to say to this as I think it was said in misunderstanding of what is going on..

Bottom line for community (a lesson I learned the hard way): Don't fuck with other people's money to "teach them lessons", despite your passionate crusade against stupidity.

I misinterpreted, the line above seem to suggest that you thought that people should be able to crusade against stupid people, but that the general communuity look down upon it so its probably best not to. Great to see you learned some lessons from those early experineces, I have been scammed before so I perhaps jumped the gun a little. 

[Mitzplik]

When people trusted Trade Fortress they allowed him to do whatever he wants with their money in exchange for "now I owe you xx bitcoins". Thats what the ripple network provides in exchange for TF BTCs.

They cant be redeemed unless you and someone who trusts Trade Fortress trust the same gateway. Then, when you redeem your BTC, someone who trusts Trade FOrtress will have his "gateway btc" exchanged by a "TF BTC".mis this right?

You trust, you learn.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I misinterpreted, the line above seem to suggest that you thought that people should be able to crusade against stupid people, but that the general communuity look down upon it so its probably best not to. Great to see you learned some lessons from those early experineces, I have been scammed before so I perhaps jumped the gun a little.  

I don't know how you misinterpreted this:

Bottom line for community (a lesson I learned the hard way): Don't fuck with other people's money to "teach them lessons", despite your passionate crusade against stupidity.

Anyway, I get that a lot. If misinformation were gold, this forum would be Fort Knox.

[solex]

I think TF should definitely pay back those hundreds of bitcoins in the time he specified in the contracts. Oh wait, he didn't specify a date!

One of the most important corallaries to Murphy's Law is this:
The hidden flaw never remains so.

I can't believe this. Ripple is an IOU trading system where the IOUs have no settlement date?! How on earth is it working at all? Is there any real business being transacted, or is it just a testing ground for enthusiasts?

I agree that no one can be called a scammer just because they receive something and issue an IOU for it unless they break the terms for settlement. If there are no terms for settlement then, according to the English language, the quantum of the transaction is a gift, and that is the end of the matter.

[Littleshop]

I think the thing with tradefortress is pretty obvious.  He said here is a debt in a system I do not agree with.  I will not pay it.  I do not see how he can be scammer tagged for that.  He could have 'sold' false debt or otherwise made real promises and that would get him a scammer tag.  He did not do that.

[webr3]

I think the thing with tradefortress is pretty obvious.  He said here is a debt in a system I do not agree with.  I will not pay it.  I do not see how he can be scammer tagged for that.  He could have 'sold' false debt or otherwise made real promises and that would get him a scammer tag.  He did not do that.

He definitely needs the untrustworthy tag, at the least. He has asked people to trust him, which they have, with the sole intention of being untrustworthy.

[Littleshop]

I think the thing with tradefortress is pretty obvious.  He said here is a debt in a system I do not agree with.  I will not pay it.  I do not see how he can be scammer tagged for that.  He could have 'sold' false debt or otherwise made real promises and that would get him a scammer tag.  He did not do that.

He definitely needs the untrustworthy tag, at the least. He has asked people to trust him, which they have, with the sole intention of being untrustworthy.

No.  He asked people to set their trust flags in ripple and explained to them what would happen if they did.

[arsenische]

This entire debate is the same as my Pirate bet where I didn't ask for escrow (because I was trying to prove a point about making bets without escrow and trusting strangers on the internet). I never accepted a penny from anyone and I still got instant scammer tagged and was held to actually paying people the balances of my prank.

The general consensus was that I "scammed expected value" or some whatnot. Despite feeling awful for others having made ignorant financial decisions based on that bet and having learned my lessons, you'd think this community would have learned it's lesson too. Instead, here we are again, except this time it seems Theymos is waiting on something (I'm honestly not sure what that is).

I said it in some other thread and want to say it again here. Matthew N. Wright didn't set the deadline for his payment in his prunk bet (there was a deadline for Pirate's payment, not Matt's). So that bet was not binding exactly the same way as IOUs are not binding. There was no date set for payout. Why did Matthew have to pay, but TradeFortress doesn't have to? Maybe so called victims who received money should return them back to Matthew?

[Mitzplik]

In Trade fortress case, there are IOUs issued.
This is the payment when you use Ripple trusted pathways.

You trust me 100 BTC, Im free to use them as long as I issue you an IOU.

When will you get them? I don't know. But you have the IOU. Its a Security with no maturity date, no interest, just TRUST.

What has he promised? To pay back today? Tomorrow? Next month?

When you get a loan, when you can be sued? When you default. When you default? When you don't pay it in a pre-accorded period of time.

So, since when Trade Fortress can be asked to pay the IOUs?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

MNW's promise was that he will give 100% ROI if pirate defaults. When pirate officially defaulted, he has broken his promise.

Compare to a bunch of tokens / IOUs which has zero terms. No contract unlike MNW, end of story. If I said that I would redeem those for actual BTC, and did not specify a time, then it would have to be a reasonable amount of time.

[Matthew N. Wright]

MNW's promise was that he will give 100% ROI if pirate defaults. When pirate officially defaulted, he has broken his promise.

Compare to a bunch of tokens / IOUs which has zero terms. No contract unlike MNW, end of story. If I said that I would redeem those for actual BTC, and did not specify a time, then it would have to be a reasonable amount of time.

Exactly why I asked Theymos "If I had made the bet with Ripple IOUs instead, would I still have gotten the scammer tag?". It's a legitimate question that he needs to answer. Apparently scamming expected value, cheating, tricking, promising without delivering, whatever you want to call it-- is fine so long as it utilizes the Ripple system.

I know why you did what you did, I know why I did what I did too. I know I'm not a scammer and I'm pretty sure you're not a scammer. This isn't about you or me, this is about what people classify as "scammers", what criteria Theymos uses to give the tag out (for god's sakes, BFL still doesn't have a tag!), etc. This is about policy, protocol and having a community understanding that it's in fact not okay to play with other people's money to prove points.