Calling the PONZI/SCAMS "Investor-based games" its immoral

[rammy2k2]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

[1714936552]

1714936552

[hayan]

IMO, there's a big difference between something that presents itself as an investment / mining rental / etc but is actually a ponzi scheme, and a gambling / similar site where the game being played is based upon the ponzi scheme concept and the owners are completely open about this. If you know that's what you're investing in, and you know the risks involved, then I don't see how that's unfair to anyone.

[Quickseller]

Scams are not moderated. It is impossible to tell when something is possibly not a scam so by moderating 100% scams the forum is defacto saying that what is not removed to be not a scam

[Muhammed Zakir]

It is typically a game. Investors are trying hard to build a wall which owners can't jump of. The title may seem bad but it is good because we can add non-ponzis in it too but if it is named 'Ponzi', only ponzis can be there. Else, forum should add a board like Litecointalk.org's.

   -MZ

[irfan_pak10]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

Its fine i think no problem for saying it lije that. Because investing on every thing is always risky things. You may earn aome good amount or may lost some or every thing. So please be careful

[Lethn]

The issue isn't that these ponzi schemes exist it's that people are stupid enough to keep investing in them despite our warnings, you can't blame us when people refuse to listen.

[freedomno1]

The issue isn't that these ponzi schemes exist it's that people are stupid enough to keep investing in them despite our warnings, you can't blame us when people refuse to listen.

Pretty much, active warning and it's hard to enforce
Having it's own section is for the better

[redsn0w]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

[Muhammed Zakir]

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

Nobody care!

I think a link to caveat emptor wiki page should embedded or should be put in the warming.

   -MZ

[koshgel]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

This.

It is a corner of the gambling section now. If noobs go looking in that section and still ignore all the warnings, there is not much more that can be done. Scams/games are not moderated here.

[fildza]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

This.

It is a corner of the gambling section now. If noobs go looking in that section and still ignore all the warnings, there is not much more that can be done. Scams/games are not moderated here.

I think only that mod can do cause they are too many

[ajareselde]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

This.

It is a corner of the gambling section now. If noobs go looking in that section and still ignore all the warnings, there is not much more that can be done. Scams/games are not moderated here.

It would be the best if those kind of "investor" games are banned instantly, since there is no way they can provide what they promise, and are built to fall apart once u have no more morons to fuel it.
But keeping them is a corner is the next best thing, and if anyone finds them digging and uses them anyways, despite the warning above, then all we can do is laugh.

cheers

[Slark]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

That section is a sort of "trashcan" for all the ponzi schemes discussion, don't worry because it is presente the warning :

Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose.

I think this is sufficient, if someone want to lose their money it is free to do that ( now all know what is a ponzi scheme).

This.

It is a corner of the gambling section now. If noobs go looking in that section and still ignore all the warnings, there is not much more that can be done. Scams/games are not moderated here.

Apparently, it seems that some people will always ignore warnings and be a victim of scams. I'm fully confident that this warning is enough for people with brain. We can't make people unscammable by banning every scam. People need to start thinking by themselves.

[rammy2k2]

Ok, its a trashcan, but why to allow these SCAMS ? i mean, there is no doubt , not a single one, that 1 site from all that section is legit ; there is no such a thing, why allow it?
Its got nothing to do with gambling, its got nothing to do with investing ...

[Mitchell]

Ok, its a trashcan, but why to allow these SCAMS ? i mean, there is no doubt , not a single one, that 1 site from all that section is legit ; there is no such a thing, why allow it?
Its got nothing to do with gambling, its got nothing to do with investing ...

The staff doesn't remove scams. Ever.

[hilariousandco]

Ok, its a trashcan, but why to allow these SCAMS ? i mean, there is no doubt , not a single one, that 1 site from all that section is legit ; there is no such a thing, why allow it?
Its got nothing to do with gambling, its got nothing to do with investing ...

Define legit? Some pay out and some don't but people know the rules when 'investing' in them so some may argue the opposite as to whether they're gambling or not. You could just as easily lose money on a dice site gambling or even invest in one which could turn out to be a ponzi or straight up scam. You might not like them because they're a ponzi but people are free to make up their own mind and at least these are upfront and honest about it.

[Anduck]

There's a reason these kind of "games" are against the law in many countries. These are not like usual gambling games.

Ok, its a trashcan, but why to allow these SCAMS ? i mean, there is no doubt , not a single one, that 1 site from all that section is legit ; there is no such a thing, why allow it?
Its got nothing to do with gambling, its got nothing to do with investing ...

The staff doesn't remove scams. Ever.

Is there a good reasoning why this is the way here? Isn't it staff job to keep these forums in order and safe?

[Mitchell]

Is there a good reasoning why this is the way here? Isn't it staff job to keep these forums in order and safe?

To prevent abuse mostly. Yes Ponzi's are often bad, but if we start removing them we would have to remove other proven/most likely proven scams as well. This can get really tricky, so we stay out.

19. Possible (or real) scams and Trust ratings are not moderated (to prevent moderation abuse).

Q: Why haven't you banned <insert scammer username here> who is an obvious scammer?
A: Possible (or real, not for me to decide) scams are not moderated to prevent moderator abuse. If we start picking out which ones we call "scammers" and ban, we would make a lot of decisions based on biased opinions.

Q: Do you moderate/delete (possible) FUD, accusations and untrue information?
A: No. We don't have enough time to check every single piece of information and verify the validity of the sources. Also, just like scams - too much room for bias and abuse.

From the "Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ"-thread.

[Anduck]

Is there a good reasoning why this is the way here? Isn't it staff job to keep these forums in order and safe?

To prevent abuse mostly. Yes Ponzi's are often bad, but if we start removing them we would have to remove other proven/most likely proven scams as well. This can get really tricky, so we stay out.

Why is it better to not even try to remove the obvious scams? You could do a few mistakes here and there, still I'd say it would be worth it. Of course it requires work to moderate for scams. Anyway wouldn't it be better for all of us if these forums had more utility?
To prevent admins from calling me dumb, I let you know I understand this is not a simple decision.

[Mitchell]

Why is it better to not even try to remove the obvious scams? You could do a few mistakes here and there, still I'd say it would be worth it. Of course it requires work to moderate for scams. Anyway wouldn't it be better for all of us if these forums had more utility?

I would agree with removing a very obvious scam, but even they could turn out to be legit. I would be in favor of that if the rules ever change, but it isn't our job to babysit users on the forum. There is a massive warning sign and people shouldn't rely on the staff to remove scams.

This is my opinion though and I'm sure one of the staff members could explain this a lot better than I did.

[Quickseller]

Is there a good reasoning why this is the way here? Isn't it staff job to keep these forums in order and safe?

To prevent abuse mostly. Yes Ponzi's are often bad, but if we start removing them we would have to remove other proven/most likely proven scams as well. This can get really tricky, so we stay out.

Why is it better to not even try to remove the obvious scams? You could do a few mistakes here and there, still I'd say it would be worth it. Of course it requires work to moderate for scams. Anyway wouldn't it be better for all of us if these forums had more utility?
To prevent admins from calling me dumb, I let you know I understand this is not a simple decision.

Some of even what most people think are the most obvious scams turn out to be legit.

It is up to the people who are trading on here to take their own precautions to prevent themselves from getting scammed (which includes doing their own research and coming to their own conclusion)

[dserrano5]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .

First people whine because the Foo section is full of scams, now that the scams have been moved to their own de-facto trashcan, people whine about its name.

Well at least there's no people whining about sites moved to a trashcan of sorts (or is there? I don't even get near that part of the forum).

[rammy2k2]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .

First people whine because the Foo section is full of scams, now that the scams have been moved to their own de-facto trashcan, people whine about its name.

Well at least there's no people whining about sites moved to a trashcan of sorts (or is there? I don't even get near that part of the forum).

I dont whine, please READ what i said.To make it simple for you, maybe u will understand like this :




My point is, they should be AT LEAST called PONZI's, and not investor  games.

I hope im clear for u too now dserrano5

[rammy2k2]

Why is it better to not even try to remove the obvious scams? You could do a few mistakes here and there, still I'd say it would be worth it. Of course it requires work to moderate for scams. Anyway wouldn't it be better for all of us if these forums had more utility?

I would agree with removing a very obvious scam, but even they could turn out to be legit. I would be in favor of that if the rules ever change, but it isn't our job to babysit users on the forum. There is a massive warning sign and people shouldn't rely on the staff to remove scams.

This is my opinion though and I'm sure one of the staff members could explain this a lot better than I did.

When a site has the word "ponzi" in his domain name, u see a chance for it to be legit ? Or "make 300% in 3 hours" ?

Anyways, i wont post no more about this, clearly, these scams/ponzis are tolerated so there is nothing to do about it.

[SaltySpitoon]

Calling it the Ponzi section would then require an additional section for other "investor based games" so why not lump them all together? I think all gambling is a scam, dice sites are just as scammy as ponzi sites in my opinion, however I have no objections to people gambling/wasting their money as they wish, I just know that I wont. If people dont like ponzis, they can avoid the section. If they have an objection to words spoken in french, they can avoid the french section, no one is forcing anyone to partake in anything. At this point, no one is being tricked into dumping money into a ponzi scheme, because the ponzi schemes are telling everyone that they are a ponzi scheme, and people are still dumping money in.

[fox19891989]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .

First people whine because the Foo section is full of scams, now that the scams have been moved to their own de-facto trashcan, people whine about its name.

Well at least there's no people whining about sites moved to a trashcan of sorts (or is there? I don't even get near that part of the forum).

I dont whine, please READ what i said.To make it simple for you, maybe u will understand like this :




My point is, they should be AT LEAST called PONZI's, and not investor  games.

I hope im clear for u too now dserrano5

I am fully agree with u, if it is called "ponzi/hyip game" should be better, or I am afraid some newbies may be scammed by them because they see"investor-based" so they think they are investors, but not speculators or potential victims.

Overall, "ponzi/hyip game" is much better, I hope mods can see my advice.

[Berau]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

I agree with you.

After this section has been added, significant amount of ponzi scheme owners has advertised on the forum by creating alt accounts and that results in more scams.

[hilariousandco]

I am fully agree with u, if it is called "ponzi/hyip game" should be better, or I am afraid some newbies may be scammed by them because they see"investor-based" so they think they are investors, but not speculators or potential victims.

Overall, "ponzi/hyip game" is much better, I hope mods can see my advice.

I think HYIP should be added to either the title or description and was surprised it wasn't. At least that covers both ponzis and pyramids.

[Berau]

I am fully agree with u, if it is called "ponzi/hyip game" should be better, or I am afraid some newbies may be scammed by them because they see"investor-based" so they think they are investors, but not speculators or potential victims.

Overall, "ponzi/hyip game" is much better, I hope mods can see my advice.

I think HYIP should be added to either the title or description and was surprised it wasn't. At least that covers both ponzis and pyramids.

Some HYIP sites in their T&C say that they have the right to close the site down anytime.

That's how crypto double got away for doing what they did.

[Joca97]

By calling PONZI/SCAMS section "Investor-based games", its immoral in my opinion when we all know that section is FULL OF SCAMMERS .
You should simply forbid this kind of scams, not make their own section, and on top of that calling it "Investor-based games" ...

i still dont understand why they opened a section for those stupid ponzis
they are scam 100% and like you said full of spamers

can someone say to me why the section is open for them?

[Muhammed Zakir]

i still dont understand why they opened a section for those stupid ponzis
they are scam 100% and like you said full of spamers

can someone say to me why the section is open for them?

To free Games & Rounds and to move all thos posts to 'Trashcan v2.0'.

Honestly, can't you think 'why'? It doesn't seem hard if you have read Meta threads regarding the discussion about a new sub-board for HYIPs and Ponzis.

   -MZ