Here's what you're all doing.  Stop questioning authority! |
|
|
|
I figured you wouldn't miss that little fact in my signature and you responded just as I predicted. You make to many assumptions, I never said I was against gambling. I was only commenting on your preference, I guess you missed the main point, which is something I also predicted. Your not so hard to read at all. Your reaction only proves my point, so I guess I should thank you for that. But I wont.
I have read many of your posts, and the way you talk to people is deplorable. That's really why I posted here. Someone needs to stand up to you and tell you how horrible your behavior is. The only thing you find important is your own opinion. Sorry to tell you this, but most people don't think you opinion is as important as you do. And just so that you know, I figure because you think it's OK to offer your opinion to others without being asked too and to be exceedingly rude about it, it must be OK for me as well. So you don't really have much room to complain. How does your own medicine taste? A little foul? And to think, my language is far tamer than yours and it still stings.
Who the fuck are you and what are you on about?! His exchange is so illogical and anti-business it makes me laugh every time I see it. Most funny is that he takes pride in no one using his shitty platform. So much common sense.
In three sentences explain what your connection to business is. Also, before BTCT was invented, MPEx had already made more in fees than your collective investment capital. |
|
|
|
Sock it scamboy. Your word ain't worth jack, go make a Bitcoin conference with Nefario or whatever. I'm wondering if your "PR" actually brought you customers or just visits for your stupid blog. It brought enlightenment to the 1% or so that aren't complete retards and end up here by googling Bitcoin. The rest of you people...who cares. |
|
|
|
The fees were per-trade. If you can show me a trade where a user didn't get what they paid for... dum dum dum... -the actual trade-... then I think you might have something. Fortunately, the site code only charges trade fees after a trade has been completed and committed.
That you or that half-wit Mirca have the gall to post about honesty here is quite the joke. You publicly post scam accusations for sport just to harm your competition. Competition I might add, that summarily spanked you in all things that matter right up until the end.
That there is an "end" is completely out of my control. On even ground I have no doubt the MPEX fleecing would have continued. Perhaps now Bitfunder and Havelock can carry that torch.
Sock it scamboy. Your word ain't worth jack, go make a Bitcoin conference with Nefario or whatever. |
|
|
|
It's impossible to shut down for the moment.  Quite possibly the least meaningful thing I've read all day. |
|
|
|
MPOE-PR, surely you understand that longevity and functionality are not mutually inclusive? It is entirely possible for a platform with extensive functionality to exist only briefly, and perhaps even easier for a platform with no functionality to exist indefinitely.
As far as I can see, MPEX has never had a public fund traded on its platform before. I cannot understand why a fund which already HAS been exchange-traded in the past would need to be the party bearing a proposal here.
You are confused. Something that occurred on scammy BTCT, just like something that occurred on scammy GLBSE, may not use this putative "experience" as some sort of authority. It is anti-experience and anti-authority. These funds you speak of are significantly less respectable, less serious and less worthy of consideration for being run by people clueless enough to have listed there, exactly in the way some guy who spent a summer as a witch doctor in the Amazon is less likely to be considered for a serious hospital position than someone who did not. The general point about longevity and functionality in the abstract is plainly irrelevant. MPEx still has most of the BTC financial trade to date. More than GLBSE over its lifetime, more than BTCT over its lifetime, more than half of the sum of it all over its lifetime. This isn't going away just because random noobs can't afford a little BTC or don't know how to use computers effectually. |
|
|
|
For those who don't want to read that crap:
Its better to bet on just-dice than to invest in any stocks not available MPEx. The title has nothing to do with the text.
Yeah, yeah. So long as you choose to imagine what you want to read is what's written rather than actually make the effort to read and understand, you'll be worse off, with no one to blame but yourself. Just sayin'. MPOE-PR is the clueless one. Now if she had said it would be better to give to charity, I'd have nothing to say. Considering who she works for and how she denigrates people, I guess you should expect her to favor lining the pockets of greedy gambling operators who take advantage of people who may have an addiction, over helping the poor.
Besides, her motives are highly suspect. This all smacks of an industry that is just trying to shutout newcomers and protect it's own territory.
I think its way past time to just ignore MPOE-PR and her senseless drivel.
Charity? Are we on the philanthropy boards or on the securities forum of btctalk? If you're into charity, by all means go work on that. Why are you on a bitcoin forum sporting a minefield betting game in your sig while yipping about "gambling greed" and labeling logical, honest ideas you won't or possibly can't read "senseless"? Pick a line. |
|
|
|
Perhaps we can fill out this table and add columns/rows as people think of more things that are important, or have other suggestions? | Name | hosted in US? | Trading Fee | Easy to use / solid website | distributed | | Impossible perfect exchange | NO | 0% | YES | YES | | BTCT | YES | 0.25%/0.20% | YES | NO | | BitFunder | YES | 1.0%/0.5% | YES | NO | | Havelock | ? | 0.4% sell only | YES | NO | | Others? |
More things that are important Things that are more important: security, liquidity, reliability, financial competence, etc. Though the entire US-based thing isn't any good in any case, I'll grant you that. |
|
|
|
I prefer hardware. Every service will go glbse over time...  %2 Except y'know, the very one that pointed out that glbse and other play pretend exchanges won't last. |
|
|
|
Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.
This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.
A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions. As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues? That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising". |
|
|
|
Maybe not the exact words but that was pretty much the spirit. Even with these terms, as far as I know, the btctc seems to have been operated very honestly and ethically. You disagree, go invest in NYSE.
Putting a clause up about how you're not what you pretend to be while representing to the userbase that you are in fact that thing while accepting fees for the use of this disaster and within a few months shutting down wouldn't seem at all "honest" or "ethical". You might want to explain how that's supposed to work. And pretending that the NYSE is the only operation that doesn't lie through its teeth is about as devoid of honesty. |
|
|
|
|
This doesn't belong in the Securities subforum, you know.
|
|
|
|
In speaking to Ukyo Bitfunder is not an option.
Unfortunately the list I get from BTCT.co does not have everyone's BTC address needed to continue coupon payments. I would estimate it is not much more than 45% complete.
Is Burnside providing the same drama as James McCarthy back in 2012? Hopefully not, but it shouldn't be too surprising that play-exchanges have similar problems once faced with the reality they'd have wished to ignore. |
|
|
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people “investing” who’d be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, “crowdfinance”, “assets”, “securities” and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to “invest” with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or “lend” with BitJam or “trade” with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their “winnings”). That’s pretty much the extent of this magical “research” they do, that’s their “due dilligence”. Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% “interest” ? Want 3.5% “dividends” ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you’re “investing” into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your “invested” “portofolio” that you’re “managing” would have. And you don’t even have to wait, you can click the button for a new “dividend” period as soon as you’re ready to see the results.
I’m not even kidding. Source. |
|
|
|
Participants should be asbolutely clear about this: depending on the underlying reasons for the closure of BTC-TC, it is entirely possible that no other exchange will be able to take over BTC-TC assets; nobody yet knows the answer to this question. If no other exchange offers a credible plan, it is not possible to continue with the fund anyway.
Your ignorant approach to the matter is pretty much the reason you find yourself in this sad situation. Pretending like "there are no solutions" because you don't actually have what it takes to use the solutions is a very flimsy excuse for your own inability. |
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTICE TO ALL BTC TRADING CORP WEBSITE PARTICIPANTS
As a result of recent changes in the virtual currency regulatory environment, the btct.co and litecoinglobal.com virtual stock market websites will be closing down. The following is our current schedule:
Approximately a week ago, both sites were closed to any new users and new asset creation was disabled.
Effective immediately, in conjunction with this release, trading will be halted, all order books cleared, and trading re-enabled.
October 7, 2013, all forms of secondary market trading will be halted on both sites.
Approximately October 31, 2013, both sites will be taken offline. It is strongly suggested that participants take the following steps to protect all of their virtual assets:
All participants should take steps to transfer all of your BTC and LTC (and any other data you wish to keep, such as CSV trade histories) held on the sites to your personal computer or another trusted site.
All participants should make sure that their public BTC or LTC address is properly set in the Account page on the Settings tab whereby it can be shared with all issuers.
All “issuers” should have the contact information concerning their “investors”, and we ask that all “issuers” communicate with their “investors” as soon as possible as to how they will ensure that all are treated appropriately.
We regret this development. However, we want to do everything we can to minimize problems arising from this transition. It is our goal to keep this shutdown orderly and calm.
Thank you for your participation, creativity, loyalty and sense of community over the past year. Additional communications will follow as we work out the details.
Ethan Burnside
BTC Trading Corp.
What I want to know is this: after six months during which you've charged users superlative fees for using imaginary services you failed to provide, how exactly are you going to effect the refund of those BTC? Seems that if I rent a house and ten days later the landlord wants me to move he owes me money above and beyond whatever I paid him upfront, twice in most jurisdictions. Getting people to list on your "exchange" in the spring and telling them to pack it in the autumn is in no way different. So, how do you intend to identify those you owe BTC to as a result of your tortiously gross negligence, and how do you intend to calculate the BTC sums owed and by what date do you intend to have repaid everyone? |
|
|
|
Since its beginning BitBet has been tolerant of bets placed following an event that effectively ends the bet, refunding all such late wagers upon resolution. This policy was intended to be forgiving of the occasional errant bettor who might not've noticed that a currency had already traded at a certain price, that a verdict had just been read in a court case, or who had otherwise just missed a cutoff. As users have gradually shown over time and have exemplified in the extreme today, BitBet's tolerance is taken for a chance to swindle the operators and legitimate users by spamming bets after the resolution criteria has been met. Henceforth, and in the interest of fairness and uniformity, all wagers received, whether refunded or not, will be subject to the same 1% fee. The FAQ will be updated presently to the same effect. |
|
|
|
Now here comes the Bitcoin.
A gift from God gives the wretched joy.
I nominate this for sloganization. |
|
|
|
|
Kind of a shitty way to store produce tho, isn't it? Not to mention buyers can't see/smell/otherwise verify the quality and ripeness of whatever item.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
