Pages:
Author

Topic: Ponzi "Game" == Negative Trust? - page 5. (Read 8479 times)

legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
January 16, 2015, 09:05:53 PM
#55
I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.

You can think that but at least that dice site is owned by a reputable member of the forums who has a high probability of NOT running with the funds if something goes wrong. In addition there is provably fair verification. I'd counter that anyone is a sucker to deposit their money into a highly suspect site, opened by a newbie that barely speaks English, promising unsustainable returns
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 09:04:01 PM
#54
I'd just like to state that we are talking about ponzi games, not actual ponzis themselves... I don't want this thread coming off topic.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 1005
January 16, 2015, 09:01:52 PM
#53
statistically speaking your first statement is correct. However in the short run, it is possible for people to end up with more money then they started with.

Actually I just realized I told a lie earlier. I have played a ponzi game before. A long time ago I put in 4.5BTC (when it was a lot less) into a ponzi game for fun and withdrew it a few days later at a 10% profit. A few months back I also invested 0.01BTC into a ponzi to see how their custom multi-cryptocurrency payment system worked as it looked cool and I also ended up making some money from it. In both cases I made a profit in the short run.

The house edge is also known prior to a gambler playing (at least it is advertised)
What is the negative expected value of poker? it varies

and the casino is not actively trying to cheat/deceive the gambler (as you described how a ponzi player would be a "good" ponzi player)

I didn't actually mean it like that, but rather a good ponzi player would be trying to outplay other ponzi players, the owner "could" be another ponzi player.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:57:17 PM
#52
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?

I wasn't here last year, also I'm talking about ponzi games... Not ponzis.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
January 16, 2015, 08:55:41 PM
#51
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites.

You answer that point. Why not answer the one I produced before?

If ponzi is such a legitimate gamble as well as profitable for a long time operator, where are the long term ponzis? The concept is not new. There were streams of them last year. Where are they now?
copper member
Activity: 2870
Merit: 2298
January 16, 2015, 08:54:36 PM
#50
I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.
statistically speaking your first statement is correct. However in the short run, it is possible for people to end up with more money then they started with. The house edge is also known prior to a gambler playing (at least it is advertised) and the casino is not actively trying to cheat/deceive the gambler (as you described how a ponzi player would be a "good" ponzi player)
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:54:00 PM
#49
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

When I go to the lending section, I decide for myself what I want to and don't want to trust. Same with gambling sites. I didn't say you should send btc to every ponzi game you see. You should use your best judgment.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
January 16, 2015, 08:51:31 PM
#48
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?

What the fuck kind of reasoning is this? It's called being proactive and helping people.

Go into the lending section then and lend your funds to every newbie who promises to pay you back.

sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:49:03 PM
#47
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.

Why not let the consumer decide for themselves then instead of negging every possible scam. Why not neg someone when they do scam?
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 1005
January 16, 2015, 08:48:37 PM
#46
I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen

I think that anyone who plays a dice site is a sucker and will be parted with their money several times over due to the house edge. I think that anyone promoting dice sites are enabling others to lose money.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:47:46 PM
#45
Well Michael, this is the 2nd time you have used your position on the default trust list to try to censor my actions.

I don't see it as censoring your actions at all. He made a valid point.
Look at the trust he left me. Do you think leaving negative trust for ponzi operators is in any way scamming?
I never said you scammed, I left you negative trust because I don't "trust the trust that you leave" its not accurate in my eyes therefore it can't be trusted.
Quote from: trust page
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
Yes you did. When you leave negative trust you are saying the person either scammed or is a scammer. If you do not trust my trust ratings then you can remove me from your trust list.

Okay, so maybe I did in your words then... Let me clarify.

Scam- To defraud; swindle
Swindle- To take money or property from someone by using lies or tricks.

I believe that your negative trust is tricking people into surrendering their opinions to you so that you can make them believe that these ponzi games are not to be trusted.

Do I really have to do this quick seller... You're making me go so far for a point that I've proven a ton of times in this thread.
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1451
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
January 16, 2015, 08:47:00 PM
#44
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?

Casinos and exchanges are businesses. They try to maintain a reputation to keep their costumers. I'm sure majority of users here wouldn't use a casino or exchange if their service quality wasn't rock solid. Most long standing businesses are ran honestly and surely are not built with the sole intention to scam people when the owner decides to close his sceme down.
copper member
Activity: 2870
Merit: 2298
January 16, 2015, 08:45:28 PM
#43
I find it quite funny how many people here supports for free market trade, against regulation etc but once something like an honest ponzi comes around suddenly they are like "THIS WEBSITE IS ILLEGAL OMG GOVERNMENT SAVE ME AND SHUT DOWN THIS ILLEGAL WEBSITE. EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS THEM SHOULD BE ARRESTED NSA USE 0DAYZ TO PWN THE OWNERS AND JAIL THEM". The ponzi doesn't lie, it does exactly what it says it will do, if people want to play ponzi's knowing the risks then let them.
I am not saying any of that. My argument is that I feel that any ponzi "game" operator are going to scam. I personally think anyone who invests in a ponzi is a sucker who will eventually be parted with their money several times over.

I think that anyone who is actively promoting ponzis (that I think will eventually scam) are enabling the scam that will eventually happen
copper member
Activity: 2870
Merit: 2298
January 16, 2015, 08:41:38 PM
#42
Well Michael, this is the 2nd time you have used your position on the default trust list to try to censor my actions.

I don't see it as censoring your actions at all. He made a valid point.
Look at the trust he left me. Do you think leaving negative trust for ponzi operators is in any way scamming?
I never said you scammed, I left you negative trust because I don't "trust the trust that you leave" its not accurate in my eyes therefore it can't be trusted.
Quote from: trust page
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
Yes you did. When you leave negative trust you are saying the person either scammed or is a scammer. If you do not trust my trust ratings then you can remove me from your trust list.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:40:44 PM
#41
@Quickseller
They choose brand new accounts because they have seen what you do to new accounts and dont want that happening to their trusted accounts.

Now don't go telling me you wouldn't neg a trusted account on the same basis cause if you wouldnt then yhstd be going against all that you have said.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 1005
January 16, 2015, 08:40:25 PM
#40
I find it quite funny how many people here supports for free market trade, against regulation etc but once something like an honest ponzi comes around suddenly they are like "THIS WEBSITE IS ILLEGAL OMG GOVERNMENT SAVE ME AND SHUT DOWN THIS ILLEGAL WEBSITE. EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS THEM SHOULD BE ARRESTED NSA USE 0DAYZ TO PWN THE OWNERS AND JAIL THEM". The ponzi doesn't lie, it does exactly what it says it will do, if people want to play ponzi's knowing the risks then let them.
copper member
Activity: 2870
Merit: 2298
January 16, 2015, 08:38:46 PM
#39
It is likely that the ponzi site is going to steal all investor money in one swoop, not over any period of time. The first sign of trouble is that no one received their payout even though some people should. The ponzi "game" would obviously be abandoned and the operator would create a new account to repeat the process.

The skill is to try and determine when the site will stop paying. This may start with obvious signs like late or missed payments, but it may also be when the owner decides the ponzi has gotten to a certain size. So estimating the size of the ponzi funds and the rate it is growing at is is another way to tell. A really skilled player may even decide to invest more funds  when they think the owner is going to close up in order to try and prolong the ponzi.
I don't see how investing more funds would prolong the ponzi. If the owner is going to run away with investor funds then investing more would just give them a bigger take.

I don't think a ponzi would have any real reason to be "late" with payments because the money is all "there" in the unspent inputs of their ponzi address. A missed payment would obviously mean they have run away with investor money.
The ponzi operator will have an unlimited amount of time to launder/mix bitcoin to make it appear that they are not playing against their players. The players on the other hand will have a much shorter time frame to check this. From what I have seen, many people "reinvest" their money back into the ponzi after receiving payouts so seeing money go from the ponzi back into the ponzi would be expected

Well if the owner is using mixers then a skilled player will find out which ones he is using and ignore payments that are tainted by those mixers. And of course they reinvest, you should reinvest if you think it is still likely to pay out.
It would be expected that many players would either buy funds from an exchange or withdraw from other casinos to play the ponzi. A ponzi operator could counter this countermeasure by depositing funds on various exchanges and casinos and then withdraw to fresh addresses.
Point is, not all ponzi's are scams, don't paint them all with the same brush.
They are asking to be trusted with gamblers' money. Most of the ponzi's that I gave negative trust to were brand new accounts. Picking a random ponzi that I gave negative trust to (BTC-Pyramid-Ponzi) their first post is advertising their site. Looking at their site their minimum investment is .005 BTC. This is very similar to a brand new user asking for a loan on their first post. Would you trust a brand new user with .005 BTC if they promised to repay after x days? I assume the answer is 'no' and the reason is because you do not think they will repay. Why do you think it is that so many brand new accounts were created to promote ponzis? Do you think it had anything to do with the fact that they plan on eventually running away?

Your points about how a skilled ponzi player can avoid loosing money all involve ways to detect when the operator is trying to cheat. Do you think it would be fair to say that any casino that is actively trying to cheat players would be considered a scam?
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
January 16, 2015, 08:38:35 PM
#38
You think the idea of a ponzi "GAME" is new? They were here last year too.

Why are there no long term ponzi games if it so fair and profitable for an operator? But dice sites, casinos, and sportsbook have been in the Bitcoin world for years?

Michaeladair your arguments are weak and your promotions of ponzis is shameful

I dont promote all ponzi games, i just dont believe in leaving negative trust... Also theyre Ponzi Games... GAMES. i

You didn't answer my point above that

"You think the idea of a ponzi "GAME" is new? They were here last year too.

Why are there no long term ponzi games if it so fair and profitable for an operator? But dice sites, casinos, and sportsbook have been in the Bitcoin world for years?"
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I'm a Web Developer: HTML, CSS, PHP, JS.
January 16, 2015, 08:36:59 PM
#37
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.

I mean, this isn't anything different from a casino site? They have the same capacity to scam... Or even an exchange?
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1451
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
January 16, 2015, 08:35:53 PM
#36
I don't think that the negative trust is because of them running a game as you call it. it's rather the fact that whatever is going to happen the owner is going to get away with people's BTC.
Pages:
Jump to: