Thanks to everyone who has replied so far. I'll try to answer everyone's questions, plus I have a couple of more of my own.
[1]
My responses do not address issues of collateral or lack thereof which have been covered in other threads.[2] If there are multiple occurrences of TX's occurring under the example given, then I feel that further confirms ownership of a wallet address?
Providing loans to a borrower who invest on Ponzi, promotes Ponzi, the owner of Ponzi means I am supporting Ponzi. As I do not support Ponzi I will not give a loan to a borrower who is a Ponzi scammer. Hope my point of view is enough clear. My vote goes to "NO! - even with collateral"
As I see it, there are only two ways a borrower can obtain loans
[1] by disclosing the intended purpose e.g.
"car's engine blows-up", or, they withhold their reason e.g.
"personal".
In either case, a lender "Alice" can facilitate a loan where a borrower "Bob" has provided a wallet address publicly, or privately where the borrower "Mike" sends a private message with their wallet details. In the first case, perusing the TX's or wallet address' posted can confirm Alice has sent funds to Bob.
In the second example, an "educated guess" can be made if the lender, Alice uses the same wallet address to facilitate a loan to Mike. We can look at Alice's wallet address and discern a TX took place around the time the loan request were made - if a TX did in fact happen _plus_ the value of the TX is close to, or matches a loan request, then surely that would prove the recipient wallet address is "owned" by the borrower? [2]
From there, if we then see where those funds are sent, we can make an educated guess as to whether or not the secondary recipient is a Ponzi/HYIP participant and by extension, the borrower is engaging in a Ponzi/HYIP etc.
It is not that easy to know if borrowed funds are going to be used to enable a PONZI/HYIP or any other cause you may dislike, most of the reasons given (that I see in lending thread) are just "personal", which I think it is fine since privacy it is very important, so If I were to lend, I would not ask too much questions either.
But it is obvious that if funds were going to be used for something that I dislike, like a Ponzi, I would not lend.
Brick and mortar lenders will always ask you what your loan is for. They have a responsibility to the board of directors and shareholders. On the other hand, a sole operator has to rely on their own advice and can sometimes be tripped up - especially by gamblers whose addiction is consuming them.
Excluding obvious scam situations, it can sometimes happen that the ponzi scheme is difficult to detect.
How so?
It would be enough to think about what happened with Bitconnect, which developed over a very long time and then turned out to be a scam.
It is difficult for an inexperienced person to easily distinguish a scam from a good investment opportunity, and being able to borrow money further diminishes prudence!
In general I think that prudence is always the right way to achieve a goal. If I were a lender I would avoid lending sums for a long time, unless they are secured by a strong collateral.
Who is
Kraken ? Or
Sharmin ??
From my point of view for the loans I have made they are all unsecured personal loans for smaller amounts. So, I look at it as no different then them going to a friend or coworker or whoever and borrowing a couple of hundred dollars till payday. What they do with it is more or less their own business. For the amounts I have given out you really could not do a HYIP kind of thing.
If they came to me and asked for a couple of thousand to setup a Ponzi the answer would be no, because more or less you are supporting one at that point.
Yes, that's my point above that a single person facilitating loans can on occasion be misled as to who (i.e. alts) or what (e.g. personal) they are lending money for.
If they did not tell me and I did not ask, well that's on me. But, would we ever know the truth anyway? If you @Timelord2067 came to me here and asked for a few thousand because the engine in your car just detonated and you need to get something to go to work till you can buy a new one. I would probably give it to you since I really doubt you would blow a decade old legendary account and it's alts for a few grand. BUT if was to start the TimeWarp2067 HYIP how would I ever know if it never got traced back to you?
We are all kind of anonymous here.....
-Dave
Our alts (if any) may be mostly anonymous, but a paper trail isn't. If a lender sends funds to a borrower and 30 minutes later those funds are sent to a wallet address they can be proven by a search engine check to be involved in PONZI / HYIP activities, then the borrower has taken advantage of the lender.
how can you know that the "reason" as to why people loan money is a legit reason and is 100 % risk free
You don't - a lender can stipulate terms such as the 33/7 lender who says "No gambling" - other terms can be stipulated as part of an application, especially if the lender is receiving applications from a newbies who don't offer collateral.
nothing is 100 % risk free just as much as you don't know for what purpose the borrower will use your money you have lend him
there is always some kind of uncertainty/risk involved when lending people money even when they are trusted (or even family)
True. In this place there is less scrutiny than a bank would offer, hence the elevated level of monitoring to ensure scams don't occur.
I have never borrowed from members of this forum. What I usually see is that the borrower only submits general reasons in the proposal (eg personal interests, trade).
Ponzi are quite despised in this forum, so I'm not sure someone would take the initiative to provide reasons for this kind of specific purpose hoping a loan proposal would be approved favorably.
I'm not actually sure whether or not PONZI/HYIP activities will get a person the total ban hammer, however, there are a number of users who are prepared to distrust those who do participate in such activities. This comes back to what I said in my response just above.
Perhaps if @theymos or @LoyceV were reading, they could answer the question of (( PONZI/HYIP = Perma-Ban )) ??
Poll
