Quote from: repentance on November 09, 2014, 02:42:26 AM

Quote from: deluxeCITY on November 09, 2014, 12:29:57 AM

I think the reason why "defcon" was adopting the role of a "leader" was to inspire trust in his marketplace, especially after it has been hacked as many times as it was hacked. If you are not active in the community then people will not trust you as much

The cult of personality which has existed around SR "leaders" may have inspired trust, but it's been misplaced trust. Hackings and law enforcement take-downs have happened under the watch of these trusted leaders.

Whenever the shit hits the fan, there's always a big "trust no-one" push and the emerging leaders always tell the community to assume everyone is law enforcement and act accordingly. That advice is very quickly forgotten as people once again get wrapped up in the idea that they're part of some heroic movement for change and that the leadership is going to great lengths and making great sacrifices to protect them. The reality never matches the rhetoric, though.

Power and money are heady intoxicants, but there's a danger in believing your own publicity. When you start believing your own PR, you put others at risk.

Users need to stop buying into the idea of SR as a movement or community. They need to view it as a commercial enterprise and stop believing that the people at the top are martyrs who'll protect those beneath them. They need to stop wanting to like and be close to whoever is at the top. Buying into the mythology creates vulnerability on both the part of the leadership and the users and leads to stupid mistakes.

You are correct, it was misplaced trust, as SR2 was hacked multiple times to the tune of millions of dollars worth of bitcoin. They were however acting "honestly" and were eventually able to repay users their lost bitcoin by using funds from site commissions. It was only when the site was eventually shut down that users lost money