.

[Cory]

I think 16 is about right, at that age you should be mature enough to understand the resposability of asking for money from a stranger..

If you want to measure responsibility, age is definitely not the right way to go about it. As I've said is my earlier posts in this thread, better ways to gauge responsibility include post count and previous successful trades.

[1714600331]

1714600331

[1714600331]

1714600331

[1714600331]

1714600331

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Sadly there has been some correlation to age vs. number of defaulted loans.

I think with age comes maturity, there will always be some ahead and behind the curve.

We are all witnessing the ebb and flow of this thread and I think over time certain respectable younger people will become more obvious in the community. Therefore deeming a second look on a case by case basis, if those individuals request.  I cannont speak for Senbonzakura. but I would encourage this thought process with him.

I'm glad to hear that you may be willing to make exceptions. Unfortunately, that does not change the fact that it is unfair to restrict all persons in a immutable group based on the actions of others in that group. There should be no extra hoops to jump through. A person cannot choose their age; it is not a good measure of their reliability.

I would much rather loan an older, more mature person my hard earned dollars/bitcoins than loan them to a 16 year old who's most likely got no reason to even need a 5 btc or so loan. What does a 16 year old buy with $50, and even more important, can I be sure that they even have a job to pay me back? Age has everything to do with responsibility when you're talking about a general population, so I do agree to setting a limit to the age required. Though some 16 year-olds may be responsible enough to handle someone elses cash, most can't. Hell, most can't even handle their own.

[Maged]

The thing is, should somebody underage default on their loan and not lie about their age, you can't threaten them with legal action. I know you don't even bother with trying to pursue legal action (at least currently), but that's a strong reason to keep honest people honest. If a kid realizes at the last minute that he can't pay you back, even though he meant to, there's little you can do to encourage him to figure something else out.

[Cory]

Sadly there has been some correlation to age vs. number of defaulted loans.

I think with age comes maturity, there will always be some ahead and behind the curve.

We are all witnessing the ebb and flow of this thread and I think over time certain respectable younger people will become more obvious in the community. Therefore deeming a second look on a case by case basis, if those individuals request.  I cannont speak for Senbonzakura. but I would encourage this thought process with him.

I'm glad to hear that you may be willing to make exceptions. Unfortunately, that does not change the fact that it is unfair to restrict all persons in a immutable group based on the actions of others in that group. There should be no extra hoops to jump through. A person cannot choose their age; it is not a good measure of their reliability.

I would much rather loan an older, more mature person my hard earned dollars/bitcoins than loan them to a 16 year old who's most likely got no reason to even need a 5 btc or so loan. What does a 16 year old buy with $50, and even more important, can I be sure that they even have a job to pay me back? Age has everything to do with responsibility when you're talking about a general population, so I do agree to setting a limit to the age required. Though some 16 year-olds may be responsible enough to handle someone elses cash, most can't. Hell, most can't even handle their own.

I've noticed that nearly every post in this thread supporting the age limit cites reasons unrelated to age. If you think that it is important that the borrower has a reason to need some money, then ask for some details. If you think that it is important that the borrower has a job to pay you back, then ask for some paystubs. I don't see why age needs to even be a question.

The thing is, should somebody underage default on their loan and not lie about their age, you can't threaten them with legal action. I know you don't even bother with trying to pursue legal action (at least currently), but that's a strong reason to keep honest people honest. If a kid realizes at the last minute that he can't pay you back, even though he meant to, there's little you can do to encourage him to figure something else out.

That is extremely reasonable. If this were the case, then the blame could be passed on to the lawmakers. However, I know of no jurisdiction in which stealing only becomes illegal past a certain age. Do you know of any?

[Maged]

The thing is, should somebody underage default on their loan and not lie about their age, you can't threaten them with legal action. I know you don't even bother with trying to pursue legal action (at least currently), but that's a strong reason to keep honest people honest. If a kid realizes at the last minute that he can't pay you back, even though he meant to, there's little you can do to encourage him to figure something else out.

That is extremely reasonable. If this were the case, then the blame could be passed on to the lawmakers. However, I know of no jurisdiction in which stealing only becomes illegal past a certain age. Do you know of any?

They aren't stealing. They are merely breaching a contract that is unenforceable because the IBB entered into it knowing that the person was underage. At least in the US, contracts are only enforceable against someone underage if they lied about their age and the IBB made a reasonable attempt to verify it.

However, I am not a lawyer, so please take this with a grain of salt.

[indio007]

I don't think it would be enforceble even then. Maybe against their parents but that's it.

Problem really is these amounts are so small they need to be in small claims court.
I don't picture anyone spending $300 on a plane ticket to file a small claim of $50.

That's why I brought up selling debts. Then people can buy a claim that is local an sue in the name of the original party.
It's called assignment of a chose in action.

For instance, IBB makes a loan to someone in Boston for 10BTC.
Te person defaults.
I buy the claim at a discount and sue them in my local court.
IBB has limited it's loss and I make a profit collecting.

It will also lower the default rate when people know there wages will be garnished.
Right now scammers are relying on lack of legal recourse do to the non-local nature of the transactions.

The lack of recourse has nothing to do with the fact that the object bargained for is Bitcoin. It's access to the courts that is the problem.

[teflone]

I don't think it would be enforceble even then. Maybe against their parents but that's it.

Problem really is these amounts are so small they need to be in small claims court.
I don't picture anyone spending $300 on a plane ticket to file a small claim of $50.

That's why I brought up selling debts. Then people can buy a claim that is local an sue in the name of the original party.
It's called assignment of a chose in action.

For instance, IBB makes a loan to someone in Boston for 10BTC.
Te person defaults.
I buy the claim at a discount and sue them in my local court.
IBB has limited it's loss and I make a profit collecting.

It will also lower the default rate when people know there wages will be garnished.
Right now scammers are relying on lack of legal recourse do to the non-local nature of the transactions.

The lack of recourse has nothing to do with the fact that the object bargained for is Bitcoin. It's access to the courts that is the problem.

Ahhhhh.... I like your thinking..

[Cory]

If IBB sells their debts, then, in order to please investors, they should probably not lend to those who cannot be prosecuted. This includes members of countries which don't have somebody willing to buy IBB's debts or competent contract laws. They should also avoid those who can legally void a contract, such as minors.

[Cory]

I can't argue with that reason. As long as you encourage prosecution of everyone who don't pay back their loans, as an investor looking solely to make a profit, I would definitely prefer that you only lend to easily-prosecutable persons, which don't include minors.

[BitcoinStars.com]

Keep up the great service to the bitcoin community IBB 

[FlipPro]

It would be very hard to secure loans via the Internet. Especially the way you're doing it. No offense, I just hate seeing good Bitcoins go to scammers who don't give a damn about this community or Bitcoins in general. You are sort of facilitating bad behavior by literally giving away free money to strangers. Money that isn't even yours (you got most of it from GLBSE) therefore you see no true value in it, other than people saying it's worth "this". I like your idea for Interest free loans, but whats the point of your bank existing in the first place? How do YOU make money? All of it sounds super fishy, and I really don't like where this is going, even if you really are the one loosing money. I say please change your practices and make it look like you're at-least trying to turn this into a legitimate business, otherwise it looks like a poorly planned HYIP...

[Explodicle]

It would be very hard to secure loans via the Internet. Especially the way you're doing it. No offense, I just hate seeing good Bitcoins go to scammers who don't give a damn about this community or Bitcoins in general. You are sort of facilitating bad behavior by literally giving away free money to strangers. Money that isn't even yours (you got most of it from GLBSE) therefore you see no true value in it, other than people saying it's worth "this". I like your idea for Interest free loans, but whats the point of your bank existing in the first place? How do YOU make money? All of it sounds super fishy, and I really don't like where this is going, even if you really are the one loosing money. I say please change your practices and make it look like you're at-least trying to turn this into a legitimate business, otherwise it looks like a poorly planned HYIP...

He explains how he makes money here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38544.msg472938#msg472938

He also doesn't give money to COMPLETE strangers, you need 200 posts, yada yada. Being able to do business pseudonymously is one of the primary reasons to use Bitcoin in general.

[mute20]

yes, if you follow the IBB thread in project development section you would see how we make money.

IBB is a bitcoin business, doing business 'pseudonymously' as explodicle said.

we are not registered anywhere.

"All of it sounds super fishy, and I really don't like where this is going"

it doesnt sound fishy to my investors, if it was fishy then they would have sold all their shares while share prices are up.

like i said, even if we have full details  name/address etc.. that is no guarantee they will pay back the loan.

out of around 25 loans IBB provided, only around 3 have not repaid, so most have repaid.

Everything you see in IBB, logos, banners, joint venture bitcoin businesses listed on glbse, all done through forum , to help bitcoin business in forum.

So even if we dont make that much money, we are helping people.

{approx 4 btc will be paid in dividends soon}

Do you have a lot of investors? Also what do you want ibb to be in the future?

[TiagoTiago]

I've just realized somthing; wouldn't selling debt allow scammers to get loans and then buy their own debt and keep the difference?

[indio007]

I've just realized somthing; wouldn't selling debt allow scammers to get loans and then buy their own debt and keep the difference?

Yup. You could always bar re-acquisition either in the original contract or when the debt is resold. If the person conspired with a 3rd party, the 3rd party would be pretty dumb not enforcing the full debt.

[nhodges]

While I do commend you, IBB, for the wonderful service that you provide to so many members of this community, I must express my dissatisfaction with one qualification. I think it is unfair to base your lending decision on age. Not only is the client's age nearly impossible to verify, but it is irrelevant. I request that you rescind all qualifications regarding age. The ageist policy contributes to the bigotry against those under 18. Your other qualifications are all sensible, and can be related to the likelihood that the client will repay their debts. However, your current rules are prejudiced and based on stereotypes that need to be abolished from society. It is unfortunate that your organization is assisting in the spread of these wrong, discriminatory views. Please revise your conditions.

It's illegal in the United States for a minor to enter into a contractual obligation without the consent of a guardian. If he is operating a business, he needs to operate it kosher. Which is why he has "ageist" policies.

[Fiyasko]

Can we get this as a sticky? so its easy to find ?

Pretty please ?

As general "stickies" go, This isnt really, Sticky worthy, But then again, In another light, This is the most populated thread in this deticated "lending" board.
So, Yes, I would as to sticky it too, But i think thats already been done, Either that or people are Constantly last posting in here lol

[zer0]

where's the IBB joint venture page/board? or not a site yet

[Maged]

Can we get this as a sticky? so its easy to find ?

Pretty please ?

As general "stickies" go, This isnt really, Sticky worthy, But then again, In another light, This is the most populated thread in this deticated "lending" board.
So, Yes, I would as to sticky it too, But i think thats already been done, Either that or people are Constantly last posting in here lol

As I said earlier, as long as the IBB is pretty much the only game in town, this will remain stickied. When that changes, this will either be unstickied or the other group's post will be stickied. I haven't quite decided which way to do it yet.

[teflone]

and the winner is #14
Congratulations to pekv2 , you win the Islamic Bitcoin Treasure Chest !