[POLL] Should we ban something on the Bitcoin marketplace?

[kiba]

No difference to gold at all. I didn’t claim there was.
But the mechanism of investments in Bitcoin is that of a Ponzi scheme, that’s all I’m saying. And I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

In so far as anybody who save in bitcoin win. In as so far that bitcoin encourage wealth creation instead of wealth destruction, everyone win.

If everyone on the planet basically use bitcoin...well you got one hella of a global economy.

[1714770661]

1714770661

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

No difference to gold at all. I didn’t claim there was.
But the mechanism of investments in Bitcoin is that of a Ponzi scheme, that’s all I’m saying. And I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

No, this is wrong way of thinking. You should not compare Bitcoin to Ponzi scheme, because that automatically creates bad assumptions.

Ponzi scheme is about few people winning, and everyone else losing.
Bitcoin/Gold/Silver/Any non-inflating currency is about everybody winning.

You should seriously stop comparing Bitcoins to Ponzi scheme - that is just false, wrong and detrimental.

[N12]

I’m not comparing Bitcoin to it and this will be the last time I’ll try to clarify this point: Investions in BTC follow this scheme. Bitcoin itself has value. Also, you forget to mention that everyone could lose everything (if he keeps BTC). Early adopters will lose less than those coming late as they will have invested less.

Also, we just derailed the thread.

[myrkul]

Bitcoin investment is sort of the opposite of a ponzi scheme: in a ponzi scheme, the buy-in stays the same, but the payout diminishes. With bitcoin, the buy-in increases, but the payout stays the same. (should bitcoin become the only currency, each will be worth 1/21000000th of the entire economy. Note that I don't see this as likely, or even desirable. BTC will instead become the first of many competing digital currencies, much like Magic: The Gathering started the TCG genre of games.)

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Sorry, but you are still wrong.
Yet you keep shifting/changing the actual topic so that it seems that you are partially right, but that is not correct. You are completely wrong at all points.

Investions in BTC follow this scheme.

No, they do not. If they would, you would be likely to lose everything once you invest (big investment risk).
And in Bitcoin/bullion evertybody is winning.

Also, you forget to mention that everyone could lose everything (if he keeps BTC).

Incorrect. The only way in which everybody will lose everything is if Bitcoin gets destroyed/shut down.
Still, that is in no way similiar to Ponzi scheme, because in Ponzi scheme few people always win.

Early adopters will lose less than those coming late as they will have invested less.

Doesn't matter. Still no resemblance to Ponzi scheme. In Ponzi scheme, few win, rest lose. In the situation you are describing, few lose small money, the rest loses bigger money.
No similarity. In investments or whatsoever.

Also, we just derailed the thread.

It doesn't seem as if anoyone cared about that on this forum.
90% of threads gets derailed.

[ribuck]

Ponzi scheme = early adopters make most profit, early adopters carry least risk
Bitcoin = early adopters make most profit, early adopters carry most risk

That's a fundamental difference.

[nanaimogold]

There is so much written on exchangers being harassed and jailed and even killed you could fill an entire library.

I feel like we've gotten off topic. I seem to recall you supporting a ban of illegal trades in this forum. This doesn't make sense given that you've just stated exchanging fiat for non-fiat is enough to bring down the wrath of authorities. Bitcoin is inherently incompatible with statist central planning and control over the monetary system. Do you really think disallowing discussion and trading of illegal goods on this forum is going to keep the heat off?

Don't put words in my mouth. Read the post again if you are unsure;
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3535.msg51193#msg51193

My concern is that certain clowns, who blab nonstop about privacy and security can't recognise what is a secret or how to keep one. Bozos who are so self centered that it never even dawns on their dim mindscape that their actions put their intended cashiers in jeopardy.

[BitterTea]

I don't see much of a discrepancy between what I wrote and what you wrote.

I seem to recall you supporting a ban of illegal trades in this forum.

In principle I don't advocate for banning anything, however I have serious concerns about advertising contraband on this forum.

This doesn't make sense given that you've just stated exchanging fiat for non-fiat is enough to bring down the wrath of authorities.

By doing so, you paint a target on the exchangers.

Bitcoin is inherently incompatible with statist central planning and control over the monetary system. Do you really think disallowing discussion and trading of illegal goods on this forum is going to keep the heat off?

The men who run the bitcoin markets and the exchange services are not anonymous ghosts. We are real people in meat space with reams of law to obey, ID documents, bank accounts, offices and licenses. We can very easily be tapped by the lawmen.

Do you jokers really think exchangers will work for you when you have such little regard for their liberty?

First of all, I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth - I have as much regard for your liberty as you do mine. Second of all, yes I expect they will work for the community because it is to their financial benefit.

Shut the hell up already.

I would invite you to do the same.

[nanaimogold]

...
Anyway, it's nanaimogold that should answer the question. You don't have to.

And you SHOULD NOT attempt to tell me what to do. I am not your fucking secretary.

Jesus, where did all that aggression come from ?
Did i offend you in any way, did I rape your daughter or kill your little kitten ? I mean WTF dude, i just asked a question politely.

I think you just lost a possible customer.

Back in the old days people had to travel to libraries and wait for information to come by mail. You can JUST GOOGLE IT.
(...)
Do YOUR OWN HOMEWORK.

If i wanted to google it, i would just google it.

I didn't want to google it, because i wanted to hear it from you.
It was kind of "what did you mean by this exactly" question.

> I think you just lost a possible customer.

Oh, that's just so typical of the TV audience. You actually believe that's your decision to make.

Consumerist clowns like you need a case study. Ever heard of ING bank? It's popular in places where men are mostly responsible for their actions, where the population is not all soy addled followers of fashion. Anyway, they annually identify the 10% or so of their account holders who cost them the most in support issues and just FIRE THEM.

Sorry, you are too stupid to bank here. Go cost our competition. Thanks!

That concept is just so foreign to you isn't it? The idea that a business would decline to service you - you just can't get you head around that can you?

Wah wah! I am the consumer - I am always right - it says so on my TV. You have to do as I tell you. I am the consumer wah wah!

These are not the people I do business with. Frankly, they have no business to do anyway.

[nanaimogold]

See there? Stated in plain English? The first line of my post?

Here, lets quote that yet again, with bold this time:

> In principle I don't advocate for banning anything, however I have serious concerns about advertising contraband on this forum.

It's my PRINCIPLE. How much more rock solid can I state that?

Do you have any principles? Do you just waver on the breeze? On the whim of fashion? Do you stand fast on any issue?

Do you even understand what the word means?

[kiba]

Contempt for your opponents does not help them understand your position.

[BitterTea]

In principle I don't advocate for banning anything, however
...
Do you have any principles? Do you just waver on the breeze? On the whim of fashion? Do you stand fast on any issue?

Do you even understand what the word means?

I don't think you're communicating as clearly as you believe you are. Let me give you an example...

"In principle I don't advocate killing anyone, however I have serious concerns about letting criminals live"

Is it clear whether or not I am arguing for or against the killing of criminals?

[nanaimogold]

In principle I don't advocate for banning anything, however
...
Do you have any principles? Do you just waver on the breeze? On the whim of fashion? Do you stand fast on any issue?

Do you even understand what the word means?

I don't think you're communicating as clearly as you believe you are. Let me give you an example...

"In principle I don't advocate killing anyone, however I have serious concerns about letting criminals live"

Is it clear whether or not I am arguing for or against the killing of criminals?

You win the wishy washy word-wanking award.

[kiba]

"In principle I don't advocate killing anyone, however I have serious concerns about letting criminals live"

This is nonsense. This is a private forum and we're a bunch of guests. The owner get to do whatever he wants.

[nanaimogold]

"In principle I don't advocate killing anyone, however I have serious concerns about letting criminals live"

This is nonsense. This is a private forum and we're a bunch of guests. The owner get to do whatever he wants.

That's precisely why I never vote in these polls.

For BitterTea to declare that I did vote is annoying however.

[BitterTea]

You win the wishy washy word-wanking award.

Again, you are the one who said "In principle I don't advocate banning anything, however...". Explain how this does not show that you are willing to compromise your principles?

That's precisely why I never vote in these polls.

For BitterTea to declare that I did vote is annoying however.

Show me where the fuck I said that you did. I love that you keep calling me out for putting words in your mouth when you are the one doing exactly that. Between this and it taking a month and a half (so far!) to get my coffee (all while telling me nothing more than "don't worry"), you've ruined your reputation in my eyes. I just want you to know that I will not be doing business with you in the future and I can't recommend that anyone else does either.

[nanaimogold]

> Show me where the fuck I said that you did.

Right here;

>> recall you supporting a ban of illegal trades in this forum

Anyway, you have already won the wishy washy word wanking award. I know that changing the subject is classic wanking, and you really do have a flair for it, but it's not necessary because you are already the undisputed champion twister.

> Explain how this does not show that you are willing to compromise your principles?

No. You deserve none. Anyone can use a dictionary. Anything more I can say would only be repeating myself.

It is my principle to not advocate banning anything.

Damn, there goes that repeating myself again.

[TiagoTiago]

I would have voted on "don't ban anything that won't result in significant risk of having to put down the forum."

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

...
Anyway, it's nanaimogold that should answer the question. You don't have to.

And you SHOULD NOT attempt to tell me what to do. I am not your fucking secretary.

Jesus, where did all that aggression come from ?
Did i offend you in any way, did I rape your daughter or kill your little kitten ? I mean WTF dude, i just asked a question politely.

I think you just lost a possible customer.

Back in the old days people had to travel to libraries and wait for information to come by mail. You can JUST GOOGLE IT.
(...)
Do YOUR OWN HOMEWORK.

If i wanted to google it, i would just google it.

I didn't want to google it, because i wanted to hear it from you.
It was kind of "what did you mean by this exactly" question.

> I think you just lost a possible customer.

Oh, that's just so typical of the TV audience. You actually believe that's your decision to make.

Consumerist clowns like you need a case study. Ever heard of ING bank? It's popular in places where men are mostly responsible for their actions, where the population is not all soy addled followers of fashion. Anyway, they annually identify the 10% or so of their account holders who cost them the most in support issues and just FIRE THEM.

Sorry, you are too stupid to bank here. Go cost our competition. Thanks!

That concept is just so foreign to you isn't it? The idea that a business would decline to service you - you just can't get you head around that can you?

Wah wah! I am the consumer - I am always right - it says so on my TV. You have to do as I tell you. I am the consumer wah wah!

These are not the people I do business with. Frankly, they have no business to do anyway.

1. I have no idea WTF are you talking about and why the hell you keep attacking me without reason. I don't know, "IS THIS SPARTAAA" or something ?
2. For the record, i haven't watched TV (that includes internet TV) in about 4 years, because I noticed how endlessly manipulative medium it is...


I will simply stop discussing with you, because i don't have a habit of discussion with mad people.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

You win the wishy washy word-wanking award.

Again, you are the one who said "In principle I don't advocate banning anything, however...". Explain how this does not show that you are willing to compromise your principles?

That's precisely why I never vote in these polls.

For BitterTea to declare that I did vote is annoying however.

Show me where the fuck I said that you did. I love that you keep calling me out for putting words in your mouth when you are the one doing exactly that.

You better stop discussing with him, that man is a lost case.