It's been pretty hectic the last couple days. It went from (when I was checking) over $18 the night of the 23rd to just under $16 last night.

To my understanding, past successful loans don't have any bearing on whether or not someone makes the list. It's about fitting the pattern, not past transactions. The reason for this is the confidence loan issue: people who get a few successful loans to gain trust before running off with someone's money (see the stickied topic for more information).

In terms of receiving a loan, people will be more likely to lend to you if they see you have a good history here on the forums: successful trades and loans, good contributions to forum discussion, etc.. It's all about trust. Someone with three successful BTC1 loans may not be seen as trustworthy compared to someone with two successful sales and a background of helpful contributing posts. There are a lot of factors people consider when they decide to enter into transactions with fellow BitCoiners

I agree 100%. If BitCoin gets big enough, I fully expect there to be BitCoin banks for the casual users. Using those banks, just like with any sale, loan, or investment with BTC, will be up to the judgment of the person. And with BitCoin (like you said), we can also choose to take charge of our own money.

To me, BitCoin is less about freedom of money and more about freedom of choice, without attempting to "punish" people (so to speak) for not using their money in one certain way or another.

Do you mean offline as in sent to a wallet that isn't being used?

For one, BitCoins cannot be destroyed (to my knowledge). If they're in an address linked to a wallet file that gets deleted, the BitCoins are still in that address: it's the access to them that's lost.

There isn't really a way to tell if BitCoins are "lost" or never going to be used again: you could see an address with BitCoins that haven't been used in a long time, but you can't tell if the owner lost the keys, gave up on BTC and abandoned the wallet, or is simply sitting on them as an investment.

For additional clarification: the coins themselves are never offline. They're in the network stored in an address. The wallets that hold the address keys, however, can be offline (or even printed on paper). If I make a paper wallet offline and send coins to the address, the coins are still on the network in that address. It's the access to the address that is not linked to any online source.

In defense of BitInstant, they don't have an obligation or anything on their website guaranteeing that it only takes an hour:



The hour deadline is an average estimate, and if they offer to refund your fees if it takes longer and you're unhappy with the delay.

From what I've seen on the support thread and in complaint threads on the forum, it seems like people with the longer delays tend to have them because of their resistance to supply information relating to the order or to accept the support that's given to them. You wanted Charlie to email you, which he did, and you're upset about the email address he sent it from? The reply address he used was one of the three you sent you message to in your original email. Doesn't look to me like he was the one delaying things at all.

Simply by having a successful transaction. The list doesn't say that you definitely are a scammer. It's just showing that you fit a pattern that other scammers have followed. As you can see on the list, more of them have ended up as scams than as honest transactions.

Honesty and openness play big parts in successful loan transactions. Following the guidelines in this thread will help a lot in securing a loan from someone and avoiding the stigma of a potential scammer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97214.0

Those tips don't guarantee a loan. They can just make potential lenders feel more confident about lending to a person, not a forum account. If you're a legitimate borrower, you'll have nothing to worry about. Most lenders I see tend to be more concerned about whether or not you'll repay, not what you're using the loan for.

And in the end, some lenders just straight out refuse to lend to new members.

I'll give you both a +1 to your posts. In the end, one way or the other, I think it all came (and still comes) down to greed: people don't tend to have the best interest of others at heart when it comes to business.


It's just different worldviews . Hindsight is 20/20, which I believe is what memvola was getting at. Everyone looks at what happened and what factors affected it, then apply their worldview to the situation. And we all know, of course, that every person on Earth believes the exact same thing.

+1 to this post. PayPal is good for what it is. PayPal is not good for BitCoin related endeavors. I've never had trouble with PayPal when it comes to buying and selling (buying anywhere that accepts it, selling on eBay). But they can be strict if you break their rules, and they're not fond of BTC.

I see the change has already been implemented. Very nice, very organized.

“You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest. You may charge a foreigner interest, but you may not charge your brother interest, that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land that you are entering to take possession of it." Deuteronomy 23:19-20

No interest to fellow Jewish people in Judaism.

Never said it was.

It's okay for us to have a difference of opinion. We can just call each other liars and be on our respective ways.

It had more to do with risky and (quite frankly) idiotic investment practices due to deregulation in commercial and investment banking through the eighties and nineties (Graham-Leach-Bliley, MCA, and Garn-St. Germain in particular). Banks were lending to people who should not have been eligible for borrowing, and their mortgages were combined and shifted around into so many different convoluted securities and investments that no one truly knew the extent of what they were investing in.

The banks setting lower standards weren't doing it because they were victims. They were doing it to get what they could out of the loans before they passed it off to be someone else's problem. There's only so far you can pass the buck before it crumbles.

Not really in anyone's defense here, but the housing bubble crash was caused due to a lack in regulation rather than over-regulation. A lot of people at a lot of banks and firms were doing things that should have never been allowed even if just viewed from a common sense perspective.

Not that I'm a bank lover, but I wouldn't give (at least) the housing bubble to the over-regulation side.

Sounds totally legit. 

With PayPal? You're going to have a hard time finding anyone who will accept it.

I would suggest BitInstant. They've got a very good reputation around here, and I've never had any issues or delays with them.

Thanks for the sale!

Just had another quick and easy transaction with BTC4Amazon. Thanks!

Sent you a PM.

Good luck!