Coinmarketcap should have removed Bitconnect a long time ago. There were plenty of threads on the big crypto subreddits to bring attention to Coinmarketcap's willful ignorance of Bitconnect, and all they did was reduce Bitconnect's market cap by fudging the circulating supply numbers.
If the Third party was aware of the ponzi scheme, of course they should be held accountable. When they're not, then its a bit of a tough one. How can you be a 100% sure they truly weren't aware of it. I mean, I never intended to use or purchase Bitconnect, but my attention got to this subject after hearing so many mad youtubers or users commenting about how shit it was. Even reddit is full of those "be aware of.." type posts. So I feel like every website that makes recommendations that involve such high risks should make their research. Deep and elaborated research. How often does that actually happen though??..
Almost every site that "promotes" these schemes gives a disclaimer (I wont bother to repeat as you have all heard it a million times). So unless you can find some kind of proof that they are actually in collusion with these schemes, rather than simply benefiting from them, I don't think there is much that can or even should be done.
If someone gave the "non-advice" of buying bitconnect 6 months ago as a short term hold, many investors who followed that advice would have done very well. A scam? Often one way tell if someone is scamming you is to look to see if they are putting their money where their mouth is, telling you to do one thing and they do another. But with Ponzi schemes the scammers need to be invested, at least in the beginning.
Sites like coin market cap which list prices and other data should not be censored from doing so. They are simply giving out information. Isn't that what decentralization is about? On the other hand it is a worthwhile question to ask is whether accepting advertising dollars from highly questionable ventures is something they should be held accountable for. But even if the answer is "yes", then what standard should they be held to? Especially since many experts, even blockchain bulls, say that most of the coins will go to zero at some time. This is going to be a lot like the dot.com bubble, with a lot of blood in the streets. But it will also give rise to some of the biggest economic powerhouses the world has ever known. Like Bob Dylan said, "the wheel is still in spin and there is no telling who that it's naming".
Maybe the answer is to let people vote with their virtual feet. If people don't like sites that shill junk, then I am sure the demand will create new sites that won't . I think it is important to remember that the "establishment" wants to regulate and control this space (at best), asking them to come in for something like this will just be the beginning. It will be like a little country that has civil unrest and accepts help from a larger country, but when the unrest is over the larger country decides to never leave.
It's a shame how misleading some of them can be but its still down to the consumer/investor to do their due diligence of research. You wouldn't just give your money to a stranger without knowing where it was going and why so it boggles me that people do this so easily online when it comes to crypto. If its for you, by all means invest but if people don't understand it for themselves they shouldnt invest regardless of influencers opinions etc
If you are legit misleading people and just using Peter to pay Paul. Then you should be nailed to the wall. Send them to San Quentin or Rikers general population.
If it's not a "known scam" then it's hard to say what should be done as they may not have had time to do their research. If it is a "known scam" then theoretically they could be liable as well. Then again, people should do their own research, so it's a muddy situation, especially if you're trying to keep regulatory bodies from getting involved.
Even CryptoKitties seemed to be a pyramid scheme of sorts. You constantly needed new people coming in to buy the kitties, but they were degrading into nothing as you used them. It was a brilliant scheme to get a lot of money from unwitting people, because most of that information (degrading of assets, fees for sale, fees to breed) were not disclosed anywhere.
The main lessons are "buyer beware" and "do your research."
Absolutely! we should use our collective voice to help bring an end to these awful predatory practices , accepting this behaviour is no longer acecptable. Google seem to have absolutely censorship. GREAT POST.
Coinmarketcap should have removed Bitconnect a long time ago. There were plenty of threads on the big crypto subreddits to bring attention to Coinmarketcap's willful ignorance of Bitconnect, and all they did was reduce Bitconnect's market cap by fudging the circulating supply numbers.
If the Third party was aware of the ponzi scheme, of course they should be held accountable. When they're not, then its a bit of a tough one. How can you be a 100% sure they truly weren't aware of it. I mean, I never intended to use or purchase Bitconnect, but my attention got to this subject after hearing so many mad youtubers or users commenting about how shit it was. Even reddit is full of those "be aware of.." type posts. So I feel like every website that makes recommendations that involve such high risks should make their research. Deep and elaborated research. How often does that actually happen though??..
Almost every site that "promotes" these schemes gives a disclaimer (I wont bother to repeat as you have all heard it a million times). So unless you can find some kind of proof that they are actually in collusion with these schemes, rather than simply benefiting from them, I don't think there is much that can or even should be done.
If someone gave the "non-advice" of buying bitconnect 6 months ago as a short term hold, many investors who followed that advice would have done very well. A scam? Often one way tell if someone is scamming you is to look to see if they are putting their money where their mouth is, telling you to do one thing and they do another. But with Ponzi schemes the scammers need to be invested, at least in the beginning.
Sites like coin market cap which list prices and other data should not be censored from doing so. They are simply giving out information. Isn't that what decentralization is about? On the other hand it is a worthwhile question to ask is whether accepting advertising dollars from highly questionable ventures is something they should be held accountable for. But even if the answer is "yes", then what standard should they be held to? Especially since many experts, even blockchain bulls, say that most of the coins will go to zero at some time. This is going to be a lot like the dot.com bubble, with a lot of blood in the streets. But it will also give rise to some of the biggest economic powerhouses the world has ever known. Like Bob Dylan said, "the wheel is still in spin and there is no telling who that it's naming".
Maybe the answer is to let people vote with their virtual feet. If people don't like sites that shill junk, then I am sure the demand will create new sites that won't . I think it is important to remember that the "establishment" wants to regulate and control this space (at best), asking them to come in for something like this will just be the beginning. It will be like a little country that has civil unrest and accepts help from a larger country, but when the unrest is over the larger country decides to never leave.
#BITCONEEEECT!
looool
You beat me to it. specially the ones who always promote it like some famous youtubers, without mentioning any names, should be accountable too.
Good video @louisthomas ...
I have followed you ...Greetings friends
Can we pressure YouTube to stop their ads that promote them? I didn't know about BitConnect until I saw an ad about it.
It's a shame how misleading some of them can be but its still down to the consumer/investor to do their due diligence of research. You wouldn't just give your money to a stranger without knowing where it was going and why so it boggles me that people do this so easily online when it comes to crypto. If its for you, by all means invest but if people don't understand it for themselves they shouldnt invest regardless of influencers opinions etc
If you are legit misleading people and just using Peter to pay Paul. Then you should be nailed to the wall. Send them to San Quentin or Rikers general population.
excellent...and see why silver will act this year in an explosive move upward.
If it's not a "known scam" then it's hard to say what should be done as they may not have had time to do their research. If it is a "known scam" then theoretically they could be liable as well. Then again, people should do their own research, so it's a muddy situation, especially if you're trying to keep regulatory bodies from getting involved.
Even CryptoKitties seemed to be a pyramid scheme of sorts. You constantly needed new people coming in to buy the kitties, but they were degrading into nothing as you used them. It was a brilliant scheme to get a lot of money from unwitting people, because most of that information (degrading of assets, fees for sale, fees to breed) were not disclosed anywhere.
The main lessons are "buyer beware" and "do your research."
Absolutely! we should use our collective voice to help bring an end to these awful predatory practices , accepting this behaviour is no longer acecptable. Google seem to have absolutely censorship. GREAT POST.