Dear All I found the post from CCS appalling. Firstly, I'd like to know what basis other than guess work these claims regarding Osgold being a haven for "Scamsters" come? Also, since when have we all (e-golders) become the "Moral Majority" anyway? As members of the gold community, we should support and encourage all attempts in this market. e-gold was first. There are, and will be many more to follow. If we all stand around pointing fingers from a supposed "holier than thou" stand point, we will get nowhere, and outside onlookers will (rightfully) see a disorganised group of people arguing amongst themselves! Is this how we want to be seen? To actually say that "I would not discount the likelihood that OSGold has substantial capital: the scams obviously get away with a lot of money." is ridiculous. What? Osgold are the scammers? Normal market forces will prove these providers worthy (or not) in the end. Regards Fellow e-gold & OsGold user. >From: "CCS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "e-gold Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [e-gold-list] Re: Scam postings...question >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 19:28:37 -0400 > >Concerning the nature of OSGold... > >It seems that OSGold is aimed at serving various scams and their >"customers". It is good that these people have some other place >to go rather than e-gold so that the development of e-gold is not >distorted by their activities. > > > 2) They don't describe how they are holding the gold in reserve, > > other than in vague generalities. > >Quite possibly they don't have any gold. And for their purposes >it probably does not matter if they don't care about sound money. >What their customers do need is just an untraceable way to >quickly transfer ordinary money so that the scamsters can get >away with their loot. The gold part of e-gold is not what made >e-gold useful to the scamsters. > > > they said that they handle about 40,000 transactions a week, and > > several inconsistencies come up: 1) It took E-Gold 5 years to > > reach 40,000 transactions a week, but only seems to have taken > > OSGold 2 months; > >I don't find this implausible as the two cases are not the same. A >substantial number of scammees were already using e-gold and they >conducted a large volume of transactions. A large part of this >accumulated group could have just moved to OSGold; no need for >slowly attracting customers like e-gold. > > > Why is it that E-Gold has not experienced a noticeable drop in its > > weekly transactions during the past couple of months when OSGold > > has reportedly picked up so many; > >That is a good question. Note however that e-gold's velocity IS >MUCH lower than than it was last fall when a number of scams were >in their growth phases. Perhaps there are new scams running on >OSGold now and e-gold is no longer being yo-yoed by them. And the >e-gold volume is a bit lower now. Maybe healthier growth has made >up for some of the lost scammers. > >I'd also point out that e-gold's reserves have hardly budged (and >have some large decreases at times) in the last 5 months; this is >quite a change from last year. > > > However, if OSGold had that kind of money, > >I would not discount the likelyhood that OSGold has substantial >capital: the scams obviously get away with a lot of money. > >CCS > >--- >You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
