You were arguing over technicalities and trying to justify losing money, fyi 
Let's take this quote:
So what? The end result is the same, it doesn't matter if "more time to repay", "bad choice", blah blah blah, the bottom line is red, you just money. Justifying it doesn't matter, you lost money.
Make a bad decision? So what? You lost money.
The system encourages and forces you to do exactly that.
I think we've come to the end of this discussion, which, well turned into another Ripple debt discussion rather than "TradeFortress is a scammer".
Let's take this quote:
Quote
When this is pointed out, I've seen people fall back from saying that Charlie is effected by Bob being untrustworthy to then claiming that Charlie is effected because Bob now doesn't have the money to pay Charlie (due to be scammed by Alice). How is this different than the real world? It's not. If Charlie has trusted Bob for more than Bob can get (without relying on Alice) then Charlie has made a bad choice or needs to wait to be repaid. E.g. if Alice is a con-woman that cons Bob out of his money while he's on his way to pay back Charlie then Charlie doesn't automatically forgive the debt. Either Charlie gives Bob more time to repay or Charlie realizes he made a bad choice trusting Bob to not get conned or to be reliably pay his debts.
Quote
There's no way for your friend who you trust very much to repay IF he lost every single asset because it was replaced with worthless IOUs.
So what? The end result is the same, it doesn't matter if "more time to repay", "bad choice", blah blah blah, the bottom line is red, you just money. Justifying it doesn't matter, you lost money.
Make a bad decision? So what? You lost money.
The system encourages and forces you to do exactly that.
I think we've come to the end of this discussion, which, well turned into another Ripple debt discussion rather than "TradeFortress is a scammer".