Pages:
Author

Topic: "Long-term offers" - gonna have to tackle this 1 eventually - page 2. (Read 6604 times)

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Apparently nobody bothered to actually read and understand the thrust of what Theymos wrote.

In his response, Theymos admits to taking part in what he stronly suspected was a ponzi scheme where others were being actively misled about the nature of the scheme. Theymos also proudly asserts that he did profit from this "fun" scam at the expense of those who were misled. He seems to think that the profits are "rightfully" his, despite him knowing that they necessarily were to come from other dupes. By his own admission, he has demonstrated intent to defraud misinformed investors as a participant in a ponzi scheme.

The players can only be innocent if they were truly unaware that it was a ponzi scheme. Theymos stronly suspected it was a ponzi scheme and participated, despite this knowledge.

He then goes on give some flimsy excuse for why he not only tolerates but also encourages all manner of questionable and outright fraudulent activity on this board.

This is contemptible, even if I'm the only one who acknowledges it.
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014
FPV Drone Pilot
I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.

Maybe you still don't understand it either, but https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/who-pays-what-81542  these credit ratings are akin to a 3rd grader writing in crayon on a piece of construction paper which pony she thinks is prettier:

Here is PatrickHarnett's Rating (rememebeer PatrickHarnett himself runs a 1%/wk scam himself) for "RustyRyan"

Quote from: PatrickHarnett
   RustyRyan   3.00%      -      28-Jul-12      A-      10 coin/4 week minimum, weekly payout      https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/rustyryans-30-weekly-term-deposits-96163   

Yup, that's right - a 3%/wk scam, A- Credit rating.  Theymos I suppose you either don't care because you are making money or you cannot immediately discern that paying 3%/wk to borrow money & to keep borrowing more of it is literally 100% always a scam.  If you cared or could understand this you would realize the grave mistakes you have made and continue to make in this matter.  You are directly working against the best interest of this community and you are working directly in favor of scammers.

And I have also published my Credit ratings & reviews too:   https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bryan-micons-list-of-non-bcst-ponzis-still-running-with-credit-rating-105285





full member
Activity: 169
Merit: 100
Firstbits : 1Hannes
...High Yield Investment Programs (HYIPs)...

Oh. So that's what HYIP stands for. I thought it was
Huhh? Yup, It's Ponzi!
 Wink
administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
I think it's good to have credit ratings stickied. As far as I know, Patrick is currently the only person publishing credit ratings. If more people publish them, I'll unsticky Patrick's topic and create a new sticky which links to all of the credit rating topics.
administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
I added a warning to the top of every topic in "long-term offers".
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Cheesy
+1
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
Every time I see a thread like this I feel comfortable knowing theymos is in charge of these forums.
It's hard to find such a neutral, "non-interference" person. I'm not sure I myself would manage to remain always impartial like this.

Satoshi was wise even in the choice of who to put in charge of the forum. Smiley Thank you sir!

Concerning the topic, honestly, I'd just merge everything back to the Lending board. It's not the job of these boards to filter what's risky from what's not. Add a big caveat emperor sticky topic to prevent everyone and that's enough, IMHO.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1128
Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Giving people the info is a lot different than actively participating in such a scheme  Smiley

I don't.
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
Wat
Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.



Giving people the info is a lot different than actively participating in such a scheme  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1128
Utterly disgraceful.

I know, what a dick, letting people make their own choices.

Quote
3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier...

I don't see how it's odd at all, it's pretty consistent with giving people the information they need and letting them decide what they want to do with their money. As for one having more views than the other, well one has been up for ~4 months, the other for 3 weeks.

hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
Wat
Bitcointalk shouldnt be actively promoting or encouraging HYIP schemes.

The forum doesn't promote anything. This is a platform for discussion.



You shouldnt be seen to be engaging in shady activities as it undermines your position. Its the same reason Nefario doesnt invest in any securities on GLBSE. If there was a drug board on here it would be like putting dread pirate roberts in charge.

If it turns out pirate was running a ponzi scheme how can you adjudicate things with such a conflict of interest ?

The fact you have financially benefitted from the situation makes that impossible. Perhaps it would be better if someone who is impartial could take over the lending section or even remove it entirely from the forum.

You should listen to Gavin imo.




legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014
FPV Drone Pilot
Which stickies in the lending forum are you referring to again?

1) when all of these borrowing at high % scams were under "Lending" a handful of them were stickied.  a PPT was among them, I think BurtW's but I do not remember for sure.

2) Currently in the shameful & misnamed "Long Term Offers" section, there exists this sticky:  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/who-pays-what-81542   which is the PatrickHarnett (another schemer) sticky of "Who pays what"  - it is nothing but a list of current Ponzis.  He is a well respected member (to those that cannot see through the 1% per week scam, which should be obvious, but obviously is not to most of this forum's users) and gives an "A-" credit rating for a 3% per week paying "RustyRyan" borrowing scam.  He uses tables and makes it look nice.  But of course, this is just another stickied advertisement for the HYIP scammers and holy shit is it effective.  This is the main bitcoin forum remember - this users Patrick has 1000's of posts and Hero super-member status with a stickied thread - it appears totally legitimate to the newbie not scared by 1%/wk... or 3%/wk... but at least we can agree at this point 7%/wk is a scam?  Ok let's see how low we can go. (hint:  we're not close yet - ask any CPA / Accountant / Bank teller)

3) oddly enough, almost admitting to save face in the future, this thread "how to identify a Ponzi" is also stickied - the only 2 threads stickied there, and the views and pages of "WPW" far exceeds the Ponzi-identifier.  It's like the mods know these borrowing programs are all scams - but instead of working to stop the culture of scams they take part in them and give them max-effectiveness free advertising while putting up a postage stamp sized warning label so after the scams go belly up the mods can claim we warned you.


sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
Which stickies in the lending forum are you referring to again?
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1014
FPV Drone Pilot
I agree with Micon. I'm embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' and scared by 'Securities'.


Theymos did you read this?

Does the lead bitcoin programmer's opinion not hold weight here? 

Gavin is embarrassed by 'Long Term Offers' - as he should be.  Look at what you did Theymos --> http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/27/3271637/bitcoin-savings-trust-pyramid-scheme-shuts-down  here is another story about how bitcoins are the scam-currency of the now.   

I want to one day read an article that is titled "Micro-lending in Africa succeeds with Bitcoin"  - but if we are ever to see that article written the "Lending" forum can't sticky unregistered securities that derive their value from a Scammer named Trendon from Texas, just because the head moderator has a BTC interest in it.

This shit is bigger than making a few quick coins from a known scammer.  The leaders of this forum must be better than that...

legendary
Activity: 1288
Merit: 1000
Enabling the maximal migration
Nothing wrong with a crackhouse




Need I say more?
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should:
- Ban crackhouses entirely on my property. As a proponent of freedom, I would prefer not to do this.
- Determine which crackhouses may add poisons to drugs and ban them or put signs in front of them. This takes extra work and expertise that I'm not willing to deal with.
- Categorize the crackhouses based on how close to market levels their prices are, which may indicate the safety of the drugs sold there.

Wink

Man, I would love to buy you diner(it would be cheap: no booze, no coffee, no cigars lol).
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Portland Bitcoin Group Organizer
Yes, its time mods. make it happen.
administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
Utterly disgraceful.

Thanks for the detailed rebuttal.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.

You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."

If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should categorize my crackhouses depending on how likely they are to cut dangerous substances into the drugs. Wink

Utterly disgraceful.
administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?

It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.

You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."

If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should:
- Ban crackhouses entirely on my property. As a proponent of freedom, I would prefer not to do this.
- Determine which crackhouses may add poisons to drugs and ban them or put signs in front of them. This takes extra work and expertise that I'm not willing to deal with.
- Categorize the crackhouses based on how close to market levels their prices are, which may indicate the safety of the drugs sold there.

Wink
Pages:
Jump to: