[topspin]

"I think Doge could still be correctly branded a ponzi scheme"

No, the essential element of deception is absent. A Ponzi scheme involves deceiving investors. Doge isn't deceiving anyone. It's upsetting people, especially celebrity establishment types looking to make headlines, but that's not deception.

Naturally when the bubble pops the losers will claim they were deceived. They'll be fools and their claims will be specious but in a world where most 'problems' are self-inflicted they'll find an ample number of said celebrity establishment types to indulge that narrative and invent new regulators and criminalize more things...

Dreary is the word that comes to mind.

[lalaland1125]

Does a Ponzi scheme necessarily need deception in order to be a Ponzi scheme?

Seems like the essential component is more that future returns come from past investors.

[topspin]

Paying off early investors with new sources of investment is legal and the difference between that and a Ponzi scheme is that it occurs transparently; the later investors presumably know what they're investing in. Just as they do with Doge. That is until they lose and employ people to help them pretend otherwise.