Bryan Micon's List of BTC Ponzi Schemes that should not be listed as "Lending"

[slider1978]

Just so I understand, Micon simply wants the thread regarding Pirate's operation to be out of the lending forum? If thats the case then he's already won since the thread about BS&T is not in the lending forum and hasn't been for months.

[1714023550]

1714023550

[1714023550]

1714023550

[miscreanity]

This "no freedom of choice" remark is absolutely false. Look at OP: this is simply about not endorsing fraud on the forum.

No one has said that the threads should be deleted, not allowed, etc. We're talking about not labeling them "lending" and stickying them. Sheesh!

Your last remark convinces me that you're not the naive defender I initially took you for; you seem to be complicit in the fraud.

The first sentence from the OP:

Micon's list of obvious ponzi schemes you should never send BTC to and get back all you can if you already did:

Where is there any suggestion for an individual to use his own judgement, that the decision belongs to the individual? The above is not an objective stance. The majority of team Ponzi posts make unequivocal claims that are unverifiable from either direction, and proceed to tell people what to do with their own assets. Apparently, there's no such thing as buyer beware in their collective vernacular.

The whole concern about changing the tags appears to be secondary to the crusade, especially when considering the repetitious and emotionally-charged assertions devoid of proof. That's colloquially known as a witch hunt or smear campaign. Team Ponzi is more fraudulent and inciteful than any of the accused as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, in a sense I am "complicit" in some of the investments listed - shock of shocks: I'm invested in a few of them. Why? Because the risk/reward is not dictated by baseless accusations from short-sighted individuals whom have demonstrated their inability and/or unwillingness to explore alternative possibilities that are fully viable in the unregulated Bitcoin environment.

If they can't agree to disagree in the face of logic and lack of evidence, then there's an apparent lack of emotional and intellectual maturity on their part.

[gene]

Your last remark convinces me that you're not the naive defender I initially took you for; you seem to be complicit in the fraud.

Yes, in a sense I am "complicit" in some of the investments listed - shock of shocks: I'm invested in a few of them.

Straight from the horse's ass. Interesting emphasis on "invested".

Why? Because the risk/reward is not dictated by baseless accusations from short-sighted individuals whom have demonstrated their inability and/or unwillingness to explore alternative possibilities that are fully viable in the unregulated Bitcoin environment.

  Like in an alternative reality where 3000% returns are "fully viable"

[Micon]

So what I'm gathering from this thread, I should not have sent 15k worth of BTC to pirate?  Doh!

That's what team Ponzi want - no freedom of choice for anyone. They don't offer recommendations, but demands.

If you did plunk down 15k, it's your money, your decision, and your ass iff things go awry.

Just pull the principal after ~11 weeks and let the rest ride. Then there's no more risk.

Hey team Ponzi: ignorance is expensive, especially in the form of lost profit!

This "no freedom of choice" remark is absolutely false. Look at OP: this is simply about not endorsing fraud on the forum.

No one has said that the threads should be deleted, not allowed, etc. We're talking about not labeling them "lending" and stickying them. Sheesh!

Your last remark convinces me that you're not the naive defender I initially took you for; you seem to be complicit in the fraud.

+1 this isn't about not letting a guy send BTC to an obvious scammer - I'll fight for your right to do that if you want - it's about a gross miscategorization to have these Ponzis in "Lending" and it gives them massive credibility when you Sticky one of them.  It's almost like the forum endorsing a scam. 

This thread is now going in Meta:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=24.0  and I suggest categorizing the deposit programs by APR% - the scams will categorize themselves.

[Serge]

So what I'm gathering from this thread, I should not have sent 15k worth of BTC to pirate?  Doh!

That's what team Ponzi want - no freedom of choice for anyone. They don't offer recommendations, but demands.

If you did plunk down 15k, it's your money, your decision, and your ass iff things go awry.

Just pull the principal after ~11 weeks and let the rest ride. Then there's no more risk.

Hey team Ponzi: ignorance is expensive, especially in the form of lost profit!

This "no freedom of choice" remark is absolutely false. Look at OP: this is simply about not endorsing fraud on the forum.

No one has said that the threads should be deleted, not allowed, etc. We're talking about not labeling them "lending" and stickying them. Sheesh!

Your last remark convinces me that you're not the naive defender I initially took you for; you seem to be complicit in the fraud.

+1 this isn't about not letting a guy send BTC to an obvious scammer - I'll fight for your right to do that if you want - it's about a gross miscategorization to have these Ponzis in "Lending" and it gives them massive credibility when you Sticky one of them.  It's almost like the forum endorsing a scam. 

This thread is now going in Meta:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=24.0  and I suggest categorizing the deposit programs by APR% - the scams will categorize themselves.

what's APR% threshold differentiating one being legit and another scam, i mean at what percentage point to you draw a line?

[Frankie]

This "no freedom of choice" remark is absolutely false. Look at OP: this is simply about not endorsing fraud on the forum.

No one has said that the threads should be deleted, not allowed, etc. We're talking about not labeling them "lending" and stickying them. Sheesh!

Your last remark convinces me that you're not the naive defender I initially took you for; you seem to be complicit in the fraud.

The first sentence from the OP:

Micon's list of obvious ponzi schemes you should never send BTC to and get back all you can if you already did:

Where is there any suggestion for an individual to use his own judgement, that the decision belongs to the individual? The above is not an objective stance.

...


Yes, in a sense I am "complicit" in some of the investments listed - shock of shocks: I'm invested in a few of them. Why? Because the risk/reward is not dictated by baseless accusations from short-sighted individuals whom have demonstrated their inability and/or unwillingness to explore alternative possibilities that are fully viable in the unregulated Bitcoin environment.

If they can't agree to disagree in the face of logic and lack of evidence, then there's an apparent lack of emotional and intellectual maturity on their part.

The above sentence is not an objective stance. It is your stance. The forum software has cleverly posted it under your handle, which shows it is your stance. That does not imply that you, or anyone else, want to take away anyone's freedom of choice.

[BadBear]

Maybe a renaming instead.

[JoelKatz]

Apparently, there's no such thing as buyer beware in their collective vernacular.

You might want to learn what that phrase means before you accuse others of not appreciating it. From your own link: "The only exception was if the seller actively concealed latent defects or otherwise made material misrepresentations amounting to fraud."

[gene]

Maybe a renaming instead.

Whatever for? Their ponzi subforum (which almost by definition has nothing at all to do with "long term" anything) remains under "Lending". The title is still accurate, the thread is within the proper subforum, and its intended audience is here.

The organizational changes are real, but marginal.

[gene]

Hey, congratulations, you got your wish.  Now, can you lock the thread?

Why? Have these various ponzi schemes ended? If anything, this thread should be stickied right at the top of each "investment"-oriented forum.

[Clipse]

I just couldnt resist posting this gem of a thread, the ustream of his 'winning slot' strategy was removed but have fun looking at the ROFLMAO clip about "leave bryan micon alone" parody, priceless.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?1684-Micon-on-tilt-and-drunk-playing-slots-and-Seals-with-Clubs-live-on-uStream-right-now

and, dont forget this gem of top10.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?796-Top-10-Reasons-Why-Bryan-Micon-is-Piece-of-Shit-Scumbag

and he is also now without poker money which he never had since he was supported by a financial backer.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?1519-Micon-s-Backer-Dump-s-Him

Another bit of gem, this is how Bryan handles his sales, does this look like anyone even remotely decent?

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?796-Top-10-Reasons-Why-Bryan-Micon-is-Piece-of-Shit-Scumbag&p=13628&viewfull=1#post13628

If sealswithclubs want to attract current poker players to bitcoinpoker they sure as shit need to get a different person to attract them, Bryan Micon is not respected at all.

Tell me when to stop Bryan, I have 100+ more article involving you with scams over the last 6years, when I am done you would be running to your nearest pharmacy.

All these assaults on other businesses seem to be your number one tactic through the years but there is one problem here, You are the only one with a long running conartist/scamartist track record and funny enough there is some huge scams that you pulled that if someone even bothered they could properly sue you for damages or even get you locked up.

[Raoul Duke]

[gene]

I think we have some new information.

[pirate, psy, clipse, miscreanity, PatrickHarnett, imsaguy, BurtW] on the street corner or back alley:







.





.







.







.

[gene]

[pirate, psy, clipse, miscreanity, PatrickHarnett, imsaguy, BurtW] on the street corner or back alley:

I'm sorry. That last post was really unfair to the guy selling watches. He has a clear business model.

[imsaguy]

Gene

[gene]

Ridicule is the best way to deal with the ridiculous.  

[Clipse]

Ridicule is the best way to deal with the ridiculous.  

I see what you did there, Fud spreading by you is alot easier than Fact spreading by me.

Supporting Micon and the facts around Micon clearly shows you being part of his scammery just as the Micon corner tries to place those who dont bend over for them regarding BTCST except we have no track record of wrong-doing punk.

[Raoul Duke]

I think we have some new information.

[pirate, psy, clipse, miscreanity, PatrickHarnett, imsaguy, BurtW] on the street corner or back alley:

I would hang on a street corner or back alley with any of them faster than I would with you.

[gene]

Ridicule is the best way to deal with the ridiculous. 

Supporting Micon and the facts around Micon clearly shows you being part of his scammery just as the Micon corner tries to place those who dont bend over for them regarding BTCST except we have no track record of wrong-doing punk.

I'm sorry. This sentence is difficult for me to read. Try not to write while you're angry.

If you're suggesting that I play poker, rest assured I only play "cut-throat" bridge.

I would hang on a street corner or back alley with any of them faster than I would with you.

Of this there can be no doubt.

[Clipse]

Ridicule is the best way to deal with the ridiculous.  

Supporting Micon and the facts around Micon clearly shows you being part of his scammery just as the Micon corner tries to place those who dont bend over for them regarding BTCST except we have no track record of wrong-doing punk.

I'm sorry. This sentence is difficult for me to read. Try not to write while you're angry.

If you're suggesting that I play poker, rest assured I only play "cut-throat" bridge.

I would hang on a street corner or back alley with any of them faster than I would with you.

Of this there can be no doubt.

Its ok, trolls usually suffer from reading disorders.

Keep ignoring the facts.