So are are operators of GLBSE by not performing trivial due diligence and allowing operations that are exhibiting all the signs of a ponzi scheme and their affiliates to list their "securities" on their trading platform. The policy "you will not be allowed to be listed only if you tell me you are operating a ponzi" is not good enough for a financial service.
What's the point of a free stock exchange then?
Let's not try to remedy stupidity with authority, we already have the almighty State for that.
+1. Recently saw some dude on RT Capital Account, I think, talking about the problem that investors were given a false sense of security (by the SEC I think) and they should do their own due diligence before investing.
I put some money into BDT (says it collects money for running/developing bitdaytrade.com). Meni Rosenfeld is consulting the guy (Alberto). This built some trust with me (maybe it shouldn't have, but it has). Should BDT turn out to be a scam... tough luck for me, didn't do my homework, will eat up the loss without accusing nefario or Meni (how could I?) to have allowed some scam to be listed or being involved doing technical consulting for them respectively... that would be absurd.
I will leave Bitcoin if this becomes the commonly accepted attitude (though I trust Nefario and other operators that it will not). It would have zero effect in reducing scams and only hamper honest business. Please accept that people will be able to do this, some people will occasionally get scammed and learn not to, and move on.
I wouldn't go that far, personally. Some kind of legal/authoritative infrastructure being built to further regulate bitcoin-related businesses would go against some of my ideals, but it wouldn't keep me from using bitcoin. I
t doesn't render bitcoin unusable for other, less regulated markets/uses.