Craig,
The risks you speak of are real and substantial but they are not
> associated
> with outexchanges (of e-gold) per se. They are associated with DOING
> BUSINESS of any sort.
Yes, I agree. Doing business (outexchanging e-gold) does carry an
associated risk, not DIRECT risk. That risk is that someone may be dragging
you into their ways without your knowledge. It is not the act of the e-gold
outexchange, it is the act of doing business with that person. My point was
that there IS a risk, whether that risk is direct or indirect.
>e-gold because e-gold is unfortunately turning out to be a crook
> magnet.
Sad...but true. I must agree with you.
The temper of the times is to sacrifice the rights
> of
> the second with the excuse that it is necessary to stop the first.
>
> This is an unacceptable price. There has to be another way. And it is
> up
> to those of us who care about it to find an acceptable solution which
> reconciles and simultaneously achieves both objectives.
>
As has been stated many times on this list, you are a wise man. I am
open and willing to assist anyone who has any ideas in how to accomplish
this task.
> For market makers to try to become thought police does not do this.
Agreed. Unfortunately, Law Enforcement does not view it this way. The
act of completing an exchange for a criminal (even if you do not KNOW it is
a criminal) can be used against your business by Law Enforcement.
Interestingly Parker Bradely's situation comes to mind.
This
> comment does not alleviate your present practical problems trying to
> operate
> your business when no satisfactory solution is on offer. But it is good
> to keep in mind long term objectives.
So... I will continue to "maintain direct pressure on the bandage which
is absorbing the shooting streams of arterial bleeding and await a skilled
surgeon to mend that vessel"...so to speak. Yes, "short term medicine"
(even if done with the best of intentions) must not be given priority over a
"long term cure."
Perhaps the collective efforts of such a diverse group forming the eCTA
will lead to some long term solutions. We can only hope, pray, and keep our
fingers on those bandages in the interim.
"Doctor....DOCTOR....We got a BLEEDER here! Is there a Doctor in the
house?"
Eric
Eric Gaither, President
Gaithmans Gold Nation, Inc.
(317) 788-8580 Voice
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://businesses.msn.com/gege/
Gaithmans: your ultimate e-currency exchange service provider!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Spencer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "e-gold Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:47 PM
Subject: [e-gold-list] Crooks vs. honest people
> Eric,
>
> Most of the things you have said are true but you are still confusing
> different things.
>
> > My point to all of this is that if you honestly believe that there is
> > ZERO risk associated with outexchanges, you are wrong. There ARE risks
> > associated with outexchanges. Not the risk of having your transaction
> > reversed, but worse, having your company dragged into the mischief of
> > another.
>
> The risks you speak of are real and substantial but they are not
> associated
> with outexchanges (of e-gold) per se. They are associated with DOING
> BUSINESS of any sort.
>
> However, it may well be that such risks are greater when doing business
> in e-gold because e-gold is unfortunately turning out to be a crook
> magnet.
>
> > Market Makers have absolutely no way of knowing where a client got the
> > e-gold the wants to outexchange. While this protects the individual
wanting
> > to outexchange, it certainly does nothing for anyone who was victimized
by
> > the person. That has pro's and con's.
>
> Yes, it does. It is a serious problem. On the one hand, I hate the
> crooks
> and scammers with a passion and it offends me mightily that they are
> ever
> able to get away with a single penny of loot. On the other hand, I want
> the
> honest people to be able to go about their business unmolested by
> organized
> crime (government). The temper of the times is to sacrifice the rights
> of
> the second with the excuse that it is necessary to stop the first.
>
> This is an unacceptable price. There has to be another way. And it is
> up
> to those of us who care about it to find an acceptable solution which
> reconciles and simultaneously achieves both objectives.
>
> For market makers to try to become thought police does not do this.
> This
> comment does not aleviate your present practical problems trying to
> operate
> your business when no satisfactory solution is on offer. But it is good
> to keep in mind long term objectives.
>
> Best,
>
> CCS
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
