Ponzi "Game" == Negative Trust?

[michaeladair]

@Quickseller
They choose brand new accounts because they have seen what you do to new accounts and dont want that happening to their trusted accounts.

Now don't go telling me you wouldn't neg a trusted account on the same basis cause if you wouldnt then yhstd be going against all that you have said.

[Quickseller]

Well Michael, this is the 2nd time you have used your position on the default trust list to try to censor my actions.

I don't see it as censoring your actions at all. He made a valid point.

Look at the trust he left me. Do you think leaving negative trust for ponzi operators is in any way scamming?

I never said you scammed, I left you negative trust because I don't "trust the trust that you leave" its not accurate in my eyes therefore it can't be trusted.

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Yes you did. When you leave negative trust you are saying the person either scammed or is a scammer. If you do not trust my trust ratings then you can remove me from your trust list.

[Quickseller]

I find it quite funny how many people here supports for free market trade, against regulation etc but once something like an honest ponzi comes around suddenly they are like "THIS WEBSITE IS ILLEGAL OMG GOVERNMENT SAVE ME AND SHUT DOWN THIS ILLEGAL WEBSITE. EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS THEM SHOULD BE ARRESTED NSA USE 0DAYZ TO PWN THE OWNERS AND JAIL THEM". The ponzi doesn't lie, it does exactly what it says it will do, if people want to play ponzi's knowing the risks then let them.

I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

[alani123]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

[michaeladair]

Well Michael, this is the 2nd time you have used your position on the default trust list to try to censor my actions.

I don't see it as censoring your actions at all. He made a valid point.

Look at the trust he left me. Do you think leaving negative trust for ponzi operators is in any way scamming?

I never said you scammed, I left you negative trust because I don't "trust the trust that you leave" its not accurate in my eyes therefore it can't be trusted.

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Yes you did. When you leave negative trust you are saying the person either scammed or is a scammer. If you do not trust my trust ratings then you can remove me from your trust list.

Okay, so maybe I did in your words then... Let me clarify.

Scam- To defraud; swindle
Swindle- To take money or property from someone by using lies or tricks.

I believe that your negative trust is tricking people into surrendering their opinions to you so that you can make them believe that these ponzi games are not to be trusted.

Do I really have to do this quick seller... You're making me go so far for a point that I've proven a ton of times in this thread.

[Blazr]

I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.

[michaeladair]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

[koshgel]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

[michaeladair]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites. I didn't say you should send btc to every ponzi game you see. You should use your best judgment.

[Quickseller]

I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.

statistically speaking your first statement is correct. However in the short run, it is possible for people to end up with more money then they started with. The house edge is also known prior to a gambler playing (at least it is advertised) and the casino is not actively trying to cheat/deceive the gambler (as you described how a ponzi player would be a "good" ponzi player)

[koshgel]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

[michaeladair]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.

[Blazr]

statistically speaking your first statement is correct. However in the short run, it is possible for people to end up with more money then they started with.

Actually I just realized I told a lie earlier. I have played a ponzi game before. A long time ago I put in 4.5BTC (when it was a lot less) into a ponzi game for fun and withdrew it a few days later at a 10% profit. A few months back I also invested 0.01BTC into a ponzi to see how their custom multi-cryptocurrency payment system worked as it looked cool and I also ended up making some money from it. In both cases I made a profit in the short run.

The house edge is also known prior to a gambler playing (at least it is advertised)

What is the negative expected value of poker? it varies

and the casino is not actively trying to cheat/deceive the gambler (as you described how a ponzi player would be a "good" ponzi player)

I didn't actually mean it like that, but rather a good ponzi player would be trying to outplay other ponzi players, the owner "could" be another ponzi player.

[michaeladair]

I'd just like to state that we are talking about ponzi games, not actual ponzis themselves... I don't want this thread coming off topic.

[koshgel]

I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.

You can think that but at least that dice site is owned by a reputable member of the forums who has a high probability of NOT running with the funds if something goes wrong. In addition there is provably fair verification. I'd counter that anyone is a sucker to deposit their money into a highly suspect site, opened by a newbie that barely speaks English, promising unsustainable returns

[koshgel]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.

Do a quick search. The skeletons of them are still here.

And those were ponzi GAMES

[michaeladair]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.

Do a quick search. The skeletons of them are still here.

And those were ponzi GAMES

I'm just saying you can't judge a site by the past of others... I'm done with this thread for now, I've made my point clear enough. If you'd like to see what my thoughts are just look back in the earlier posts.

[koshgel]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.

Do a quick search. The skeletons of them are still here.

And those were ponzi GAMES

I'm just saying you can't judge a site by the past of others... I'm done with this thread for now, I've made my point clear enough. If you'd like to see what my thoughts are just look back in the earlier posts.

Are you leaving because your points have been refuted?

Anyone can judge the characters of the people who are opening sites deemed shady. You should have to prove and earn trust. Not have it given to you from your first post. Like you said you haven't been here that long. Maybe you should trust the judgement of other members that have seen hundreds of these scams such as ponzi GAMES. We were right about Bitcoin-stocks, and we are right about this ponzi craze too. Unless you have a vested interest in these scams, your reasoning makes no sense.

[michaeladair]

I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.

Do a quick search. The skeletons of them are still here.

And those were ponzi GAMES

I'm just saying you can't judge a site by the past of others... I'm done with this thread for now, I've made my point clear enough. If you'd like to see what my thoughts are just look back in the earlier posts.

Are you leaving because your points have been refuted?

Anyone can judge the characters of the people who are opening sites deemed shady. You should have to prove and earn trust. Not have it given to you from your first post. Like you said you haven't been here that long. Maybe you should trust the judgement of other members that have seen hundreds of these scams such as ponzi GAMES. We were right about Bitcoin-stocks, and we are right about this ponzi craze too. Unless you have a vested interest in these scams, your reasoning makes no sense.

I'm leaving cause I'm tired and this thread isnt making me happy... Anyways, I guess I haven't been here long enough to know about how every ponzi game Is a scam.

I've decided to remove the negative trust I sent quick seller not because he told me to but because I have been thinking and I think that people can make their own decisions on whether or not to listen to his accusations.

[Stunna]

I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.

The majority of people indeed lose money dicing, however the odds are extremely straight forward more so than any other gambling game and the edge is pretty minuscule at 1%. Dice is a sustainable and provably fair game of entertainment, Ponzi games ALWAYS end with users getting scammed as one user's funds are used to pay another user a premium and ultimately someone if not multiple people will lose all their money. They almost never have any value in terms of entertainment, it's hard to call them games when really they are high risk securities if anything.

The core issue with ponzi games right now is that they aren't just scamming one individual, and they are rarely if ever provably fair. There used to be games like the bitcoin bear and bitcoin gem which were provably fair ponzi games. The risks were well advertised and only one user would be losing their "investment' per round. When these new ponzi games get a large enough investment they simply steal it and continue to take further deposits and steal those as well.

I think it's extremely stupid for this forum to allow the serial scamming of users via openly letting ponzi owners advertise here. It shines an extremely negative light on this forum and bitcoin itself and puts the forum at legal risk.


I agree with negative trusting ponzi games if any of these conditions are fulfilled:


       1. Unrealistic promises/ Failure to fully disclose risks. Ex. Not calling the game a "ponzi"  (90% of games right now)


       2. Bought account: If the account they are using to advertise is bought and they are using that purchased reputation they should receive negative feedback.

  
       3. Fake users/puppets. Example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=927328.0


       4. Non-Instant games. Ponzis are now 48 hours or weekly and hold all deposits giving them the opportunity to scam massive groups of users. Example.    



My beef isn't with classic bitcoin ponzi games, it's with the new generation of games which are highly deceptive and designed to scam giant groups when users believe that an individual "greater fool" will be the victim. It's possible to run a legitimate bitcoin ponzi game, but if you view the gambling section that is rarely the case and thus the majority of these games should either be deleted from the section or receive negative trust if they are to remain.

It's pretty obvious that all these games are being run by a small group of serial scammers who simply repost a new game and make a few design changes after scamming a prior group of "investors". The simple fact that the vast majority of this forum disagrees with these games is enough justification to permanently remove them.