Topic: Ponzi "Game" == Negative Trust? (Read 8479 times)

This is not abuse of the system, this is what the system is for, letting other prople know with who they are dealing with.
It would be much more effective if the forum rules forbid ponzi of any sort, but without that, and if u cant neg rep them, you would be leaving alot of room for ponzi operators to breathe, and take in more victims.
If you neg rep someone that to the best of your knowledge deserved it, i think u did the right thing, where abusing trust system shows easily, and those people can be removed from default trust in a heartbeat.

I claim ponzis are scam, sue me.

cheers

maybe they are starting to die as of now, but who knows when they have plans coming back promoting and creating ponzi sites again.. what they are doing is like pushing away victims on using bitcoin as currency and we are all affected on that

They were starting to die out but there seem to be more ponzi threads then ever now.

They are streamlining the ponzi site process and recycling the idea over and over again.

Admins need to decide to intervene somehow

how can u open such a topic ? do you know what a PONZI is ? wtf is wrong with you people ?!?
a ponzi is NOT a game ! of course these scams owners tries to brainwash ponzi's are games ... wich they are NOT !


PS : and to answer your question, yes, u run a ponzi, so u run a scam, negative feedback .

New Ponzi operators stream never dry! Just found a new one, here its own ponzi scheme. He also have an alt account.

Agreed, I will be negative trusting all Ponzi games that are not "provably fair" in how they take funds from users. This is a very controversial issue, initially I was only negative trusting games that did not make use of the word "ponzi" but this is going too far. I'm confident that BTC-Flow will easily manage to steal hundreds of bitcoins if they are continued to be trusted at this pace and the least I can do is warn others.

The admins are dropping the ball on this issue, I urge them to begin moderating these "obvious scams" because users aren't learning and it is just pushing them away from using bitcoin entirely.

The caveat of all this is I will not negative trust a ponzi website that has made a strong effort to be provably fair. It's possible to build a sustainable ponzi game like the old bitcoin bear/gem games where an entirely random user will lose his funds to benefit the rest. These ponzi games will only result in all users losing their funds. I urge anyone who agrees with this to follow me in applying negative trust to the violating users. If you disagree that's fine as well but at the end of the day trust is an unmoderated system and I have the right to use it in a way that will minimize scams if I wish to do so. My hope is that this action will start pushing ponzi operators towards developing  provably fair risk games.

Ponzi operators are never in short supply. I've just found a new one, here its own ponzi scheme.

no its not abuse of the trust sistem
they have every right to give negative or positive trust to a member,especialy negative trust to creators of ponzis
history on this forum says that all ponzis ended a scam 100%!!

It would be a complex-trust-system for newbies. Now DefaultTrust list is good enough. If you find a mole, report it. He/she will eventually removed from it if the claim is true.

   -MZ

In theory the trust system is unmoderated and people should do whatever they want to with it.  That is, they should use it as they see fit.  The only issue comes in because of "default trust" the fact that if you do nothing, you see the results of default trust as if they were meaningful.  This can lead to abuse by folks on "default trust".  If it were me, I'd simply remove "default trust" and have everyone start off with an empty trust network until they actually meet someone they actually trust.  This would remove the perception of abuse by those on default, I think.

Grand_Voyageur is neither in the Default Trust nor in the users'(who are in DFT) trust list.


resn0w is right! Ponzis always collapses sooner or later. One of the famous in Bitcoin is PBMining, maybe GAW too. Can you show me one BIG ponzi which hasn't collapsed?


   -MZ

I don't think leave a negative feedback to a scammer is "abuse of the trust system". Maybe it is the contrary , you are helping the community if you leave a negative trust.

This is abuse of the trust system and will get you removed from default trust. It is also slander to claim ponzis are scams and you will be sued for saying that.

I think me too that IF Ponzies and other frauds cannot be banned the only way to try containing them is by bashing people starting a Ponzi with negative trust. Also they clutter the whole forum with all their shitty spam.

i agree to this

i support quick and redsnow about giving negative trust to people that open ponzis!!!
they are just a scam that will burst sooner or later...i think they should even be banned
from gambling section because they are spam!if you make a ponzi game legal then i would open personaly my self a ponzi
and hold it until i see a big btc and just take it and quit the ponzi or shut it until next round

thats why they should get negative trust!

It has already been suggested many times here but wasn't added. If we create a new ponzi sub-forum, I think 'Ponzi' in the title may start disappearing and also we might have to move some of the cloud minings too.

   -MZ

That's a good idea ,  a subforum for PONZI.

Gambling & ponzi are gambling but different path. If someone can't control himself, than he will fall into depth

By making another subforum, they can choose whenever they will visit the ponzi subforum or better visit the gambling sub-forum

They don't need to delete the threads, but move all those ponzi "games" in another sub-board. Those interested in running and playing them can have fun there, and those interested in gambling can ignore that section.

Every greedy persons do it.


They can't moderate each and every scams but they can moderate Ponzis. I believe sooner or later, they will do.

   -MZ

Some very reputable members of the forum were doing this around the time the gambling section was overrun by ponzis but this really had very little impact on people investing. People also would create additional accounts to serve as the spokesperson of the ponzi so you would need to somewhat closely follow the threads to see who is "speaking" for the ponzi
The forum does not moderate scams