I am no longer reading these threads

I have more to do than read page after page of: "ginko is a ponzi/no it's not/it may be/so what/anshe is the devil/and a whore". I will no longer be reading these threads, so let me make this final post.

- I think the ad hominem attacks directed against Anshe are stupid.
- While Anshe might have personal reasons to attack Ginko, I believe her fear is honest.
- While her threat worried me at first, after she actually told me how she intended to do crush Ginko, all I can say is "Go ahead". You'll most likely go bankrupt before I do.


That being said:

- Please stop calling my venture a ponzi.
- At least do so less histericaly.


What will not happen:

- I will not declare bankrupcy unless someone offers to pay back investors in full (which I definitely encourage people to do!) OR if the bank actually fails, be it from lack of liquidity or investment failure.
- I will not release personal OR business information. At all. Ever. Stop asking.

Yay! Thanks for that.

The reason investment risk is reasonable in the RW is people live and die on their reputation.

Game theory tells us that the anonymous business person suffers no punishment if he fails because he is anonymous and his reputation does not suffer and he is free to simply move on to the next mark.

In fact, given the format of this investment scheme and the nature of linden's involvement, the rational business thing to do would simply be to walk with the money claiming a credit crunch.

Note to self: do not give blaze money.

It's simple game theory.

The ability to punish someone if they fail to deliver is why you can trust them.

When I enter into a contract with someone, I leave myself open to recourse so that they know they can trust me to do business. By closing all avenues for punishment if I fail to deliver is a massive red flag that they should not trust me.

There is absolutely no punishment that Nicholas will suffer if he simply claims credit crunch and then vanishes with the money.

You think people don't murder people just because they would get punished if they did so?

How are we supposed to know his moral/ethical standings?

Good for you. I say "F" the detractors.

And you, as someone who doesn't have money in Ginko, will not be affected.

Can you STFU how or will you continue your personal crusade?

It's a heuristic.

Well, maybe put a little more faith in humanity. Don't say that person has no morals IF he did this. How do I know you don't eat live puppies? I don't, but until you do, I'm gonna think positively of you and not negatively based on what ifs.

Truth be told, I wouln't trust him with my money if he DIDN'T walk with it.

A good businessman would take off with the L$. A great businessman would make it so he can't walk off with the L$.

Something about that part of the phrase raises all kinds of red flags for me. I have invested before, IRL. The company freely gave up their business information, partly because I think they are REQUIRED to by law. Now, I know that Ginko is not FDIC insured, etc., but if I were to invest anywhere, I'd go invest in a company that did not have a problem with revealing business information.

JMO

Ok, so your make Nick look bad because he didn't run away with the money, making him a bad buisnessman in your eyee, but your also trying to make him look bad at the possiblity that he could run away, which would apparently make him a good buisnessman in your eyes.

Good. Now please STFU.