Quote from: Cassius on August 05, 2014, 03:55:44 PM

Quote from: lesnod11 on August 05, 2014, 06:41:26 AM

Quote from: Cassius on July 31, 2014, 08:42:55 PM

Ugh. Said I was going to bow out of this thread after making my point repeatedly and crossing swords with that vile idiot yonce. But it won't go away from my 'new replies'.

I wouldn't take that bet, even if I did bet, and I am almost certain it is a ponzi. I don't get why people think the regular payouts give it any kind of legitimacy. They don't. Ponzis carry on, paying out nicely, until they don't. Then it all falls apart overnight. What determines how long they keep going is 1) how many more people get signed up and 2) how fast they pay out the new money this brings. 120 more days is quite possible.

Does anyone have any idea about 1? It only takes one $50,000 'investor' to allow them to play for time for quite a while if most people are testing the water with $20 or $100.

And has anyone tried blockchain analysis to try to figure out where the money is coming from, if exchanges are even involved at any point?

Here's one last thing to think about. IF it's a ponzi, then you can expect the people running it to be dishonest in more than one way. That's not a stretch, right? Well, they have your email address, and your password. And lots of people reuse passwords. So if you're not 100% confident these guys are as pure as the driven snow, you might want to change that password.

EDIT: the payouts of finished contracts don't fundamentally alter things. Sure it's a bit more they've got to cover, especially if a whale is cashing out. If - it looks like plenty of people reinvest because oh, it's proven itself now. If they do cash out, it just means they have to sign up a few more people.

LOL 'vile idiot yonce' - I had my run-in's with that fool also...... makes me laugh you call him a vile idiot. Now he seems to have disappeared. I wonder if he pissed the wrong person off?!?!

I understand the 'official ponzi' of which he was an administrator collapsed. Though I think his narrative is a little different... it seems he acted impeccably throughout and was stitched up, or something.
Yonce's attitude was that ponzis are fine, assuming that his downlines are only other people who know it's a ponzi. Which is a little bit like selling guns to drug dealers, but not actually shooting anyone yourself.
Can't say I miss him.

Eh, kind of I guess. I do agree with what he was saying somewhat. If it's a ponzi, and everyone knows it is a ponzi, then it's more like a casino. At some point the buck will stop and someone will lose. So long as they're aware that that possibility was there, egg on their face.

I remember when dogecoin was new you used to see moneybomb sites all over the place where you pay N doge to buy a "bomb" that had a timer, and then you refer a bunch of people. Then when someone pays in, they get to hold "the bomb" and you get your money back plus a bonus from the buyer. At some point the timer ran out and "boom," the person holding it lost everything.

That's basically the same thing as a ponzi. The next person pays for the previous person, until one day there isn't a next person. Then the guy who is holding it loses everything.

There's nothing wrong with the game so long as everyone involved knows that those are the rules of the game, you know?

Yonce had some decent points, but his presentation sucked BFDD.