There is always a loser on ponzi and "doubling" sites. While it is permitted to advertise such sites here on the forum, why is it surprising that people that care about integrity give you negative feedback?
If a site promotes itself as ponzi and lets users know there's a big risk then I wouldn't say it's an obvious scam. It's doubtful and it's arguably untrustworthy but not an obvious scam. Promoting itself as "100% guaranteed" is definitely a scam.
@EcuaMobi: Yes I kept wearing the signature after it turned out they skipped nonces. The full story is that they also repaid those affected by skipped nonces. Firstly only those that lost, but later everyone else. The story was that they hired a 3rd person that patched in the skipped nonces, did a mistakes as they did not review the code before it went live. I can look up the relevant threads later if you want.
So you promoted it only when (at least you thought) it was just an error they were making and not and obvious scam? Yes I'd appreciate having the relevant threads please, it will save me some time.
TBH I don't know about that case. But a dice site is not an obvious scam until proved otherwise. Did he promote it even after it was an obvious a proven scam? I see he updated a previous positive trust to neutral after the scam was found.
On the other hand anything that "guarantees" always doubling your coins is an obvious scam.
To make it short: promoting a known/obvious scam deserves negative trust. Therefore I'm adding negative trust to you now. If you can prove without any doubts shorena was promoting that dice site after the scam was proved above reasonable doubt then I'll add negative trust to him too. Sounds fair?
further evidence here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=778953.0;allhis name was listed which proves he was still participating
I know he was participating. What I don't know yet is if at that time it was an obvious scam or not.