Topic: Should DT and Merit Source Members Be Promoting A Known Scam? - page 3. (Read 2608 times)

Unfortunately, you are absolutely right.

Thanks for your extremely insightful comments eddie,

the main underlying reason they are picking on me is because I was a top candidate for Chipmixer, and the DT Chipmixer mafia wants only their own people or alt accounts to benefit from that lucrative bounty...

No one in his right mind can agree with any of the insane babble produced on this thread, yet you have long standing DT members frothing over their mouths in league with NPC trolls going so far as calling me "beyond diabolical", etc.  

It's really a very petty circus and a disgrace to a once great forum who now sees some of its seemingly most trusted members sell their souls for a few dollars...

If this were a professional business or a respectable organization, well documented manipulators like suchmoon and marlboroza would be fired instantly for interfering with the livelihood and business of their employer (Chipmixer) because their fake character assassination job is actually hurting the chances of Chipmixer getting the representation it deserves on local boards.

I'll probably make a separate thread about this if I can find the time today, but I hope accounts ChipMixer and Darkstar_ are also watching and finally wake up to the total abuse of the Chipmixer campaign going on...

It's a good question.. That's why I asked..

Maybe Yobit will prove itself useful and help us find out..
What is the difference between Yobit and the last cases of campaigns advertising scams getting every advertiser red-tagged if they don't stop?
Yobit must be pretty borderline if it is so shady but this has not happened.. It is even allowed back after a spam ban.. Why?

If it's a scam enough to tag Vispillo over it then it is surely scam enough to tag all of the participants until removal no?

Starting with Vispillo, picking on Vispillo, and using it as a reason to tag just Vispillo, is a little fucked up if you won't even tag shitposters for advertising the same "scam"..


Not everyone sees situations the same way..
Obviously their are plenty of users in favot of Yobit being allowed to advertise here despite all these detractors.. Or it would be tagged up and run out of here by now, as usual..

Why don't you take it up with Yahoo?
There you have a highly trusted user in favor of it being allowed to advertise here, and if it wasn't for him, it would be banned and gone anyway..

What would most users consider as being the difference between the two of them? I see myself applying the two sides of the same coin analogy.

He knows that most of Yobit campaign participants are peaceful and passive members and they won't exclude him from their trust list, neither doing any bad things against him.That's why he doesn't care of being like that.

The trust system should not be used as a wide net shotgunning device as it is not only ineffective, counterproductive, but serves to allow actual con artists to hide in the noise. The standard of "promoting a known scam" is essentially guilt via association and far too arbitrary.

I just want to make a note here that JollyGood excluded me today after I excluded him. Those of you who have accused me of trust system manipulation and retaliation for doing the same feel free to demonstrate holding to your principles by excluding him.

I think some users might direct you to the rules of the forum rather than the real world with its various jurisdictions but keeping with the essence of your post it is absolutely not acceptable for anybody to advertise a scam and then resolve themselves of all responsibility attached to it and shift it on the end user or victim if they have been gullible enough to fall for the scam.




It is good to know Yobit was previously banned here in the forum for effectively flooding/spamming rather any other reason. I could be wrong but it looks like when they were given permission to return they tried their best to drive traffic to their own cryptotalk forum and use it as a competitor to this forum (and also just in case they got banned again) but if that was the case they failed in making any dents here.

It's not my war, and as always i'm doing idiotic thing when commenting it, but. Do you think that promoting mentally ill person which uses alt accounts to spam negative feedbacks and left positive feedbacks to himself it's trustworthy? In fact, promoting alt and trust abuser, ban evader and unstable old lady with climax?

Because you're doing exact such thing and trying to accuse someone another. Weird for me.

That is literally what he just asked you. The point being by what standard is this applied?




The inconsistency is exactly the issue. This is why we need to err on the side of less interference than more. The same standards applied to call Yobit a scam could be applied to half of the altcoin section and more. For fuck sake crypto itself could be made illegal tomorrow. This is all risky. Additionally risky does not always equal scam. Then who gets to decide how it is applied? Unless the line is clear then all this is going to do is invite tons of abuse and endless drama, and for what? Will it stop any of this stuff at the end of the day? Absolutely not.

The integrity of the system as a whole is more important. There needs to be a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contract, or violation of local applicable laws, not just suspicion. The trust system acts as a penalty, as such it should be administered based on this observable evidence, not by how good an accuser is with their creative writing skills and creating plausible theories. This is the entire reason due process exists in law, otherwise the legal system is abused to arbitrarily harass and exploit people for fun and profit like in most 3rd world countries.

The trust system is designed to prevent long cons to a lesser extent account farming as a trade history makes farming accounts much more complicated as it takes a lot more work to fake. The system should not be used like a flack cannon to mass flag and tag people because all that will achieve is to teach people to find it common and ignore it as signal noise. Again beyond that, more importantly this assembly line tagging activity consistently drags otherwise unsuspecting people into endless bullshit and drama that drives away productive user base.

Is X10 scam "or just predatory high risk investment offering"?

I'm not much of a supporter of giving up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, or in other words, protecting idiots at the expense of loosing valuable users over minor infractions that could possibly put some idiots at greater risk, but if that is what it is then atleast it should be done consistently..

This whole Yobit situation has become too fine of an obfuscated line..
One could definitely make the argument that any advertisement of any Yobit product is advertising a "scam", as in very "high risk" and even predatory "investments"/"scams?"..
On the other hand an argument could be made along the lines of "So what?".. If people are stupid enough to buy the crap then they are stupid and stupid is as stupid does..

The current situation is some sort of blurry line drifting around in the sea somewhere between both of those camps, with possible harsh punishment for tripping on it?

Stupid situation that wouldn't even exist if users didn't want that yobit dust so badly..
Seems you can get away with a lot more, and push the boundaries, as long as you throw around some coin..
Almost like a bribe.. What can you get away with as long as you are paying?

I wouldn't recommend Yobit as a very safe exchange or any of their investments as good investments, but I would use it to dump some coins or something and might recommend to use it to get in, do your business, and get out..
Also, no matter how terrible some coin or asset being traded is, if it has volatility, it can be flipped for a profit..

Is it a "scam" or just a predatory "high risk" investment offering? Where is the line?

Right..
After that it's surprising to me that it was welcomed back as it has been, especially considering its borderline scamminess.. But it pays right?


crazy-joe=off topic

These sections are moderated.

Scams are not moderated. What exactly is your point?

I'm talking about the forum Sir

What the fuck does it mean "here"? Scam is not moderated, use search button for scam related subjects. There are so many useful threads you should read.

---

Seems some people think what is done "here" is not done "for real" 

There is nothing to elaborate Sir. The forum obviously allows HYIP and pyramid schemes investments.
So you can't blame people who think it 's allowed here.

Hm, Ok, you missed my point.

Please elaborate your statement.

Small correction: Yobit's signature was never banned for being a scam, it was banned for spamming the forum.

Really? So I'm not sure this forum is legal in your country Sir.
At least 2 sections here are dedicated to that

The Gambling section

The Investor-based games section

@eddie13 I guess no one wants more drama and it is damn time consuming. Imagine tagging one account and then they say why only me and then you tag another account and they say why not that other account then you start tagging hundreds accounts and everyone accuse you of trust abuse. Or you tag one and not tag other accounts and someone accuse you of trust abuse. Then some accounts like TECSHARE above start mental gymnastic and create more drama. And when you ask them to elaborate "why is it OK to tag one scammer but if you tag 100 scammers for the same thing then it is not OK" they don't answer but they run away to another thread and repeat the same thing, and drama continues.

Anyway, if you do this:



No one will say that it is not OK to tag someone just because they are in signature campaign, but obviously doesn't work in all scenarios.

Vispilio tried to troll but in the "real life", if you pull "yeah, it is pyramid scam" and you still decide to advertise it, and you get caught, you will be fined. For example, in my country, if you knowingly advertise financial pyramid scam, which is what you agreed to advertise when you took that signature and said they run pyramid scam, you can get up to 3 years in jail.

Strong "opinions" and "free speech" can be very dangerous. Teaching people that it is ok to advertise scam because it is not your business if someone can't recognize scam is scammy behavior itself.