YOBIT SCAM: x10 Banner Promoters Will Be Tagged For Promoting a Ponzi Scheme

[Bezobraznike]

   @examplens Explain me why I need to now something that is not in my sphere of interest?
   Also try to explain me why I am tagged when I use exchange that didn't do nothing wrong to me?
   

[1714796654]

1714796654

[1714796654]

1714796654

[1714796654]

1714796654

[1714796654]

1714796654

[1714796654]

1714796654

[LoyceV]

Even if I stayed in the campaign I would still be more credible&trustworthy than 99.9% of this forum. Proven.

This is true. And that makes it so much worse: a trusted user promoting a ponzi scam is much more likely to make people spend their money on X10 than a red-trusted user who doesn't have +20 in his profile.

[iluvbitcoins]

*has sent a PM
That's all I wanted to post.
This sort of self righteous bullying all over the forum needs to stop.

Even if I stayed in the campaign I would still be more credible&trustworthy than 99.9% of this forum. Proven.

This is true. And that makes it so much worse: a trusted user promoting a ponzi scam is much more likely to make people spend their money on X10 than a red-trusted user who doesn't have +20 in his profile.

The Trust system is made to let you know who you're safe trading with and who you're not.
You agreed I would be more trustworthy than 99.9% of the forum. Isn't that an abuse of the trust system then?

Sale of ad-space and promotion are not the same thing.
Does any sane person in the world accuse PornHub for being scammers if they allow ads that run 'hot singles in your area' and 'enlarge your dick 50cm today'?
It's the vistors that decide which ads they open and which products they purchase.
Not those that sell advertisement space.
The same is even more true here.
It's the investors job to investigate what he invests in.
It's devious to mark these people as scammers simply because they joined a signature campaign.

[JollyGood]

Nonsense... your motives are not about my sending PMs. The PM I sent to all 12 users requesting they remove the x10 banner is copied in the OP.

a person that's proven his honesty a million more times than you ever will, and you're purposely missusing the trust system.

That is your opinion. Feel free tothink what you like.

Participating in signature campaigns, even if they are ponzis can never be equivalent to scamming.

You are wrong. Promoting a signature that is a ponzi makes the promoter complicit.

It's sale of ad-space. Is PornHub a scammer for allowing dick enlargment ads?

This is Bitcointalk Forum not any other website. Promoting a banner run by company which steals from people who think they are investing in a legitimate scheme is akin to being party to the scam.

*has sent a PM
That's all I wanted to post.
This sort of self righteous bullying all over the forum needs to stop.

[examplens]

   @examplens Explain me why I need to now something that is not in my sphere of interest?
   Also try to explain me why I am tagged when I use exchange that didn't do nothing wrong to me?
   

I guess you need to know what you advertise in your signature. Right?
I didn't tag you so I can't answer to that. I'm also not a fan of tagging people for their signature, but Yobit Investbox is a proven scam.

[JollyGood]

~snip~

The Trust system is made to let you know who you're safe trading with and who you're not.
You agreed I would be more trustworthy than 99.9% of the forum. Isn't that an abuse of the trust system then?

Sale of ad-space and promotion are not the same thing.
Does any sane person in the world accuse PornHub for being scammers if they allow ads that run 'hot singles in your area' and 'enlarge your dick 50cm today'?
It's the vistors that decide which ads they open and which products they purchase.
Not those that sell advertisement space.
The same is even more true here.
It's the investors job to investigate what he invests in.
It's devious to mark these people as scammers simply because they joined a signature campaign.

Your arguments get more and more ridiculous. How can you even with the slightest bit of decency and morality actually stand by those comments whole-heartedly?

JG -- I think your negative is a bit harsh for these accounts as the YoBit campaign is now over in its entirety.

There's no doubt that YoBit is sleazy and X10 is obviously a Ponzi but I don't think your 24-hour window was long enough.

Would you perhaps consider adjusting these ratings to neutrals?

You should have ended this nonsense after I reluctantly accepted the advice of nutildah who I respect a lot when he intervened (maybe without him knowing the full facts). That way you would have had some excuse to stay dignified but you are fully aware of the issue on hand yet you imply the victim is to blame for getting scammed if he ends up visiting Yobit after viewing a x10 banner in your post? That is the essence of what you are saying (just as Vispilio failed to justify).

That is an utterly disgraceful position to take adding further insult which you astonishingly claim absolves yourself of all blame because you just sold-ad space to a scam and you claim it is different from promoting a scam.

[iluvbitcoins]

your motives are not about my sending PMs. The PM I sent to all 12 users requesting they remove the x10 banner is copied in the OP.

You missunderstood something.
I corrected your statement that I'm sending PMs about the thread.
I have sent a PM. The one you have posted in reply #40.

You are wrong. Promoting a signature that is a ponzi makes the promoter complicit.

No, you ARE wrong.
YoBit has purchased ads on Google, so by your definition Google is a scammer.
Are you going to stop using Google?
You're a hypocrite if you continue using Google after they promoted a ponzi! By your definition.
That's why your definition is wrong.
Website promotion and advertisement sale are not the same thing.

This is Bitcointalk Forum not any other website. Promoting a banner run by company which steals from people who think they are investing in a legitimate scheme is akin to being party to the scam.

Steal? I don't think they take control of your wallet and deposit the funds into their website.
It's the users who decide whether or not deposit their money there willingly.

If you deposit money onto a website simply because it claims you're going to earn x10 you deserve to lose money. You really do.
Every sane person googles a website before he invests in it. If you haven't done that, I've got nothing to say.
You'll have a lot more problems in life when ICOs come up which aren't as open about their "x10".

Your arguments get more and more ridiculous. How can you even with the slightest bit of decency and morality actually stand by those comments whole-heartedly?

I volunteer in the Red Cross, I have monthly subscriptions to charities, I handled a million dollars as escrow at ONCE and tens of thousands at other deals and haven't scammed anyone.
And you call me out on my morals? They're not in question.

Where is your feeling of empathy?
You are the one negging poor members of this community who are perhaps struggling with their everyday lives just because you want to earn some brownie points from the community. Some people are really helped out by this signature payments.

That way you would have had some excuse to stay dignified but you are fully aware of the issue on hand yet you imply the victim is to blame for getting scammed if he ends up visiting Yobit after viewing a x10 banner in your post?

My dignity is not in question.
You think people see signatures that say "Invest for x10" and then deposit bitcoins instantly?
The same thing works with our FIAT currency which is x1.03/year and it isn't voluntary.

[LoyceV]

It's the vistors that decide which ads they open and which products they purchase.
Not those that sell advertisement space.

I guess I have higher standards: I don't advertise anything I don't trust.

Legally, you're probably right though. Google has been earning money having phishing sites advertise on their search results for many years, and reporting the ads doesn't mean they get removed so it's intentional.

[Lauda]

*has sent a PM
That's all I wanted to post.
This sort of self righteous bullying all over the forum needs to stop.

Wrong. I was advised to take a uniform approach (before the existence of this thread and me knowing the user list) and tag everyone instantly after sending out the PM, i.e. not even be generous as Jolly was with the 24 hours. People who removed their signatures would have their tag removed, those that didn't were implicitly acknolwedging awareness of the situation and admitting they condone advertising for scams (thus their own actions or well inaction makes them inherently untrustworthy and worthy of the tag).
iluvbitcoins please stop arguing the advertising a ponzi scam (i.e. helping people get scammed) is sensible or otherwise you'll find yourself on autopilot to self-destruction of your own account. You can thank me later.

Legally, you're probably right though. Google has been earning money having phishing sites advertise on their search results for many years, and reporting the ads doesn't mean they get removed so it's intentional.

How about we don't waste time what a broken justice system thinks should imprison regular citizen and not the lawmaker, and actually focus on the distinction between good and evil whereas Yobit is a pure display of of the latter?

[iluvbitcoins]

*has sent a PM
That's all I wanted to post.
This sort of self righteous bullying all over the forum needs to stop.

Wrong. I was advised to take a uniform approach (before the existence of this thread and me knowing the user list) and tag everyone instantly after sending out the PM, i.e. not even be generous as Jolly was with the 24 hours. People who removed their signatures would have their tag removed, those that didn't were implicitly acknolwedging awareness of the situation and admitting they condone advertising for scams (thus their own actions or well inaction makes them inherently untrustworthy and worthy of the tag).
iluvbitcoins please stop arguing the advertising a ponzi scam (i.e. helping people get scammed) is sensible or otherwise you'll find yourself on autopilot to self-destruction of your own account. You can thank me later.

Legally, you're probably right though. Google has been earning money having phishing sites advertise on their search results for many years, and reporting the ads doesn't mean they get removed so it's intentional.

How about we don't waste time what a broken justice system thinks should imprison regular citizen and not the lawmaker, and actually focus on the distinction between good and evil whereas Yobit is a pure display of of the latter?

This is probably the most well-intended post in this thread.
Stands like this can easily result in account destruction.

I will admit I am taking a more defensive stand than I usually would.
I am very much against ponzies, I have written extensive posts on this forum about the pension plan which is clearly a ponzi and where so many young people are going to lose their money. This isn't a ponzi, it's an inflationary coin (like our FIAT, except this one is voluntary) and for that reason I have removed the signature.

I didn't research into YoBit at all because I have believed it's not my job to do so for reasons I outlined above.
If I thought they were a scam I would have removed the signature much earlier. I didn't.
I will retreat now for my own good.

[Lauda]

This is probably the most well-intended post in this thread.
Stands like this can easily result in account destruction.
-snip-
I will retreat now for my own good.

That was the whole point of PM-ing users! It was for their own good, certainly not the good of the sender or people spending their time advocating for this. I would leave no ratings on you (assuming you didn't retaliate against anyone which I didn't look into). Thank you, it makes doing good much easier!

[Erdogan]

It's the vistors that decide which ads they open and which products they purchase.
Not those that sell advertisement space.

I guess I have higher standards: I don't advertise anything I don't trust.

Legally, you're probably right though. Google has been earning money having phishing sites advertise on their search results for many years, and reporting the ads doesn't mean they get removed so it's intentional.

In opinion of many people coin mixers are very bad tool that help very bad people. I belive that you trust in service that you advertise, but can you be sure it doesn't help criminals?

[o_e_l_e_o]

In opinion of many people coin mixers are very bad tool that help very bad people. I belive that you trust in service that you advertise, but can you be sure it doesn't help criminals?

In the opinion of many people, the internet, VPNs, Tor, cash, bitcoin, encryption, privacy is a very bad thing that helps very bad people.

Please read this post, and my reply to it, for why this argument is complete nonsense: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214200

[Erdogan]

In opinion of many people coin mixers are very bad tool that help very bad people. I belive that you trust in service that you advertise, but can you be sure it doesn't help criminals?

In the opinion of many people, the internet, VPNs, Tor, cash, bitcoin, encryption, privacy is a very bad thing that helps very bad people.

Please read this post, and my reply to it, for why this argument is complete nonsense: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214200

To be honest, for me, talking not even hours, but days, about that coinmixer is mixing coins for criminals is absurd, because we all know that criminals use it.
Same situation is talking about pump and dump shitcoin like X10. We all know that most coins was made for pump and dump but hate is focused on X10 because it shows more clearly all system and it is more understandable to those who do not understand investment tools of banksters.
X10 it is shitcoin created for pump and dump and nothing more. It is free market, that makes, that after some time 10% daily interest make dump of coins on market. And it is not a scam. Only idiots invest in such risky business.
Cryptocurrencies were created to give us financial freedom and if someone wants to invest in such risky shitcoins then let them do it. If he is so stupid that he does not understand how it works, then either let him go and learn, or this is not the place for him.

 

[o_e_l_e_o]

To be honest, for me, talking not even hours, but days, about that coinmixer is mixing coins for criminals is absurd, because we all know that criminals use it.

And we all know that criminals use the internet. Your point?

X10 it is shitcoin created for pump and dump and nothing more.

Except it isn't a coin at all. It can't be deposited or withdrawn. It can't be spent. It doesn't have any wallets. It doesn't have a blockchain. It exists only within YoBit.

And it is not a scam.

It categorically is, and no sane person can seriously argue otherwise. See my post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217581.msg53650350#msg53650350

Cryptocurrencies were created to give us financial freedom and if someone wants to invest in such risky shitcoins then let them do it.

It's not a coin and it's not an investment. It's a scam.

If he is so stupid that he does not understand how it works, then either let him go and learn, or this is not the place for him.

You will never convince me that it is ethical to promote a proven scam under the proviso of "Do your own research".

[TECSHARE]

To be honest, for me, talking not even hours, but days, about that coinmixer is mixing coins for criminals is absurd, because we all know that criminals use it.

And we all know that criminals use the internet. Your point?

X10 it is shitcoin created for pump and dump and nothing more.

Except it isn't a coin at all. It can't be deposited or withdrawn. It can't be spent. It doesn't have any wallets. It doesn't have a blockchain. It exists only within YoBit.

And it is not a scam.

It categorically is, and no sane person can seriously argue otherwise. See my post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217581.msg53650350#msg53650350

Cryptocurrencies were created to give us financial freedom and if someone wants to invest in such risky shitcoins then let them do it.

It's not a coin and it's not an investment. It's a scam.

If he is so stupid that he does not understand how it works, then either let him go and learn, or this is not the place for him.

You will never convince me that it is ethical to promote a proven scam under the proviso of "Do your own research".

He makes a very good point that strikes at the heart of this issue. The conclusion that Yobit is a scam is an OPINION. There may be supporting evidence, but that is besides the point. You and others have opened the door to justifying for tagging users who support projects which in the taggers OPINION is a scam. This is the can of worms you people open up with these kinds of frivolous and overbearing tags. Even if it is a proven fact, you are still acting on guilt via association, which is the bread and butter of any kangaroo justice system.

This is why myself and others have been arguing against tagging users for their signatures very fervently, because there is NO WAY to universally and reliably enforce this rule, meaning it is GUARANTEED to be enforced arbitrarily. At the end of the day, what does any of this excessive tagging behavior accomplish? Absolutely nothing, except for destroying users reputations, and causing tons and tons of disputes of course. Yobit lives on, your abuse of the user base doesn't change that.

[o_e_l_e_o]

The conclusion that Yobit is a scam is an OPINION. There may be supporting evidence, but that is besides the point.

A position overwhelmingly supported by evidence is a fact.

You and others have opened the door to justifying for tagging users who support projects which in the taggers OPINION is a scam.

Please quote where I have advocated for tagging these users.

This is the can of worms you people open up with these kinds of frivolous and overbearing tags.

Please quote where I have left tags for any of these users.

Even if it is a proven fact, you are still acting on guilt via association, which is the bread and butter of any kangaroo justice system.

Guilt via association would be accusing people who use YoBit because of the X10 scam. Making a decision to promote a scam, and taking steps to display their signature and post it all over the forum, is a conscious choice.

This is why myself and others have been arguing against tagging users for their signatures very fervently, because there is NO WAY to universally and reliably enforce this rule, meaning it is GUARANTEED to be enforced arbitrarily.

I tend to agree with this. The vast majority of altcoins are scams, and there are thousands of users who wear their signatures.

Yobit lives on, your abuse of the user base doesn't change that.

Please quote where I have abused the user base.

[nullius]

In opinion of many people coin mixers are very bad tool that help very bad people. I belive that you trust in service that you advertise, but can you be sure it doesn't help criminals?

So, Chipmixer is being unjustifiably smeared in favour of Yobit by an account with negative trust feedback from nutildah, bL4nkcode, Lauda, ibminer (twice!), and yahoo62278.  (Sorry, yahoo:  You sleep with curs, you wake up with fleas.)

Why am I not surprised?

N.b. that it is apparently a stolen/sold/hacked account with many scam accusations; and it is a “Legendary” account that, prior to this post, had exactly one earned merit received earlier today, for a post that is now deleted.  TECSHARE just doubled this account’s earned merit.

In the opinion of many people, the internet, VPNs, Tor, cash, bitcoin, encryption, privacy is a very bad thing that helps very bad people.

Please read this post, and my reply to it, for why this argument is complete nonsense: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214200

Indeed, it is the reason why I am currently advertising ChipMixer for free, on principle!

To be honest, for me, talking not even hours, but days, about that coinmixer is mixing coins for criminals is absurd, because we all know that criminals use it.

He makes a very good point that strikes at the heart of this issue. The conclusion that Yobit is a scam is an OPINION. There may be supporting evidence, but that is besides the point.

Non sequitur.  You fail at analogies.  The proposition that some criminals may abuse a good service, just as criminals abuse the Internet itself (thanks, o_e_l_e_o), has no logical similarity to the proposition that a service actively cheating its own users is a scam.

(Plus what o_e_l_e_o said.)

[TECSHARE]

He makes a very good point that strikes at the heart of this issue. The conclusion that Yobit is a scam is an OPINION. There may be supporting evidence, but that is besides the point.

Non sequitur.  You fail at analogies.  The proposition that some criminals may abuse a good service, just as criminals abuse the Internet itself (thanks, o_e_l_e_o), has no logical similarity to the proposition that a service actively cheating its own users is a scam.

(Plus what o_e_l_e_o said.)

What analogy? Uh, no, actual sequitur. You are in fact using guilt via association. Additionally, as I already stated this application of negative ratings can only be applied in a completely arbitrary fashion by its very nature, thus this should be left out of the trust system. The only result of this kind of mass spamming of ratings will be to cause people to ignore negative ratings as common. It will stop nothing and have many negative consequences.

[Bezobraznike]

He makes a very good point that strikes at the heart of this issue. The conclusion that Yobit is a scam is an OPINION. There may be supporting evidence, but that is besides the point. You and others have opened the door to justifying for tagging users who support projects which in the taggers OPINION is a scam. This is the can of worms you people open up with these kinds of frivolous and overbearing tags. Even if it is a proven fact, you are still acting on guilt via association, which is the bread and butter of any kangaroo justice system.

This is why myself and others have been arguing against tagging users for their signatures very fervently, because there is NO WAY to universally and reliably enforce this rule, meaning it is GUARANTEED to be enforced arbitrarily. At the end of the day, what does any of this excessive tagging behavior accomplish? Absolutely nothing, except for destroying users reputations, and causing tons and tons of disputes of course. Yobit lives on, your abuse of the user base doesn't change that.

   Congratulations for the great comment!