[Dracophoenix]

>>I think Doge could still be correctly branded a ponzi scheme, since the returns for an investor is essentially tied to the number of suckers that buy into it after them. An early investor can take a "structured payout" by selling off the asset once the hype-cycle is creating more and more suckers who buy into the idea.

The problem with this "definition" of a Ponzi scheme is that any transaction with a future payout directly or tangentially related to people buying into it qualifies. Homeownership is a Ponzi scheme. Employment is a Ponzi scheme. Software is a Ponzi scheme. Investing is a Ponzi scheme. Life itself is a Ponzi scheme. What GP is getting at is there should be a more specific definition that properly identifies the required element of fraud (as defined by the law) in a Ponzi scheme but doesn't demonize mass risk taking and losses that come with it. Very few people being l end up winners any endeavor. Loss alone doesn't make Dogecoin fraudulent anymore then it does the lottery.