Pathway-2-prosperity - Pathway-2-prosperity.net - Page 317

traderj · #**3161** 07-23-2008, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Humdrum

'who's responsible'? I believe everyone should be responsible for their actions.

But that is the point right? Who is responsible? If you are a ten year old kid and you ask your brother if your parents are around because you want to go root through the closet looking for your Xmas presents and they walk in on you, well of course why in the world would you trust your brother... ummmm you don't trust your brother? Wouldn't he want to know what his presents are as well?

Of course scammers will always scam, that is implied based on them being scammers.. BUT.... you say people have to be responsible for their own actions, but if the ONLY info out there is from people lying to you about as in this case P2P being legal and real etc..etc... you are being as responsible as you can be under the current conditions... NOW if you are told BOTH sides of the story by the Kool Aid drinkers and the Naysayers well yes now I would think you are the only person responsible for your actions...

You would be amazed at how many people get an internet connection for the first time EVERY day... every single day somebody logs on to the net for the first time... those are the people that don't know that 99.9% of all the programs on TG and MMG are outright scams.. they don't know the rules yet...and if the scammers are prone to try to scam them, then I fail to see where the harm is in the Naysayers offering up the other side of the coin...

Humdrum · #**3162** 07-23-2008, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awty

ENTIRELY agreed. And, it's not such a disagreement... I just happen to think that liars should be 'called' on it, and the truth laid out so that ALL can see... so - that's what I do.
?possibly just another 'hard truth'... lol...
Jeff

the problem with that is you can never call out ALL the liars. I sure as hell aint going to go knocking on the presidents door and tell him he's a scammer for spending my money. which is the point. you cant do anything about it. arming yourself, and realizing the hard facts of life are the only way. no point in trying to save the innocent and gullible if they should have dont thier homework in the beginning, not only is it not your job, but it also does no good. No one learns until they get burned. I say let the hopeful and gullible lose thier money. Next time I bet they will be more careful.

Humdrum · #**3163** 07-23-2008, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HaskellsNemesis

HI JEFF, WANT TO SEE SOMETHING RIDICULOUS? I JUST RECEIVED A WARNING FROM A WARNING BOT FOR WHAT APPEARS TO BE ONE OF YOUR POSTS. I REPLIED TO THE MESSAGE AND WAS TOLD THE WARNING BOT'S MAILBOX IS FULL. I AM MAD AS HELL AT TALKGOLD'S INCOMPETENCE. HERE IS THE WARNING:

:snipped....:
[i]

What's the point of this? Thanks for letting us know that you have nothing important to add so you just try and shut ppl up altogether. Let the guy voice his opinion, and if it 'violates' some rule, then let the admin handle it. We dont need you shuving you stuff around like you own the place. It's very rude.

Humdrum · #**3164** 07-23-2008, 05:36 AM

Oh sorry nvmd I think U may of been defending him lol my bad ^_^

Humdrum · #**3165** 07-23-2008, 05:40 AM

Anymore P-2-Pers in here who wanna fill out me poll?

http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/349475

**Abrasax** · #**3166** 07-23-2008, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Humdrum

not sure how to edit my signiture :O still noob

http://www.talkgold.com/forum/profil...=editsignature

awty · #**3167** 07-23-2008, 05:45 AM

Well, I guess all that I SHOULD say is, that I'm a EX- moderator, and I have my personal reasons for that.
And, of course, you can't call out all of the liars, but - what the he**, this is just a 'hobby' of mine, after all of the research I've done, figured I might as well make a public fool of myself ...Right?
Just MY *PERSONAL* opinion,
Jeff

Humdrum · #**3168** 07-23-2008, 05:55 AM

i guess for now we shall agree to disagree.. time for me to go home :O night

Ponzi Nemesis · #**3169** 07-23-2008, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Humdrum

i guess for now we shall agree to disagree.. time for me to go home :O night

Goodnight - well done with that poll - good move - I hope you haven't lost too much in p-2-p and that you will realise that all these HYIPs / autosurfs, etc., are Ponzi schemes after this experience.

Jungle Hunter · #**3170** 07-23-2008, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Humdrum

The point im trying to make is that if you are getting other peoples money its not like they are ignorant in that fact.

Well, apparently Nick is ignorant of that fact:

Quote:

IMPORTANT NOTE: This is NOT a H.Y.I.P. site ......
We do NOT believe in them!

You must stay away at all costs!

You must know how these guys use funds from one investor to pay the next investors' commission - it is a highly illegal practice. It is fairly simple to do, as they set the percentages in such a way that there is enough to pay the next guy and run for periods of up to 3 to 4 months ..... or even longer !

During this time, they do not invest your money - their pockets just get bigger and bigger until their H.Y.I.P. cannot sustain itself and collapses.

As are quite a few others who post here and elsewhere who at least claim ignorance as far as it being a Ponzi.

Quote:

So there is no real way of determining how many loser per winners there will be if and when the site goes down.[

You may not be able to get to an exact number, but you can get at least a rough approximation of the MINIMUM number of losers required to support winners in a larger Ponzi by looking at the returns paid. For every $1 made by someone, there's $1 lost by someone else, so the minimum number of losers to support each winner will be in roughly the same proportion as the percentage return that's paid. Even if you really try to put a fine point on it, unless you have some unusual circumstances it takes a lot to alter that ratio significantly across a big group and you'll likely end up with about the same result. More significant to the minimum number of losers in the end will be how much the admin takes out of the pot as the game runs and how many still happen to have money left in when it goes *poof* which will only cause the MINIMUM number to increase.

Quote:

But they should still have the choice regardless. and if they CHOOSE to put there money in and it turns out to be a ponzi, well no guilt here. they made the decision.

That assumes that their choice isn't based on fraudulent representations.