How much is bitcoin magazine's rep worth? You know with him being co-owner and all. Not good for a fledgling magazine to have a scammer on board. Nor is it good for the forum here to have staff that scams as well. This bet affects more than just his reputation.
His magazine's forum rep isn't worth $100,000 either. I somehow doubt they have made $100k worth of sales from it yet, plus I doubt anyone who buys it online or at Barns & Unable will give a crap if one of the owners has a scammer tag on a forum full of trolls. If he does pay out, I'll be surprised. I'm not sure if that will make my opinion of him improve or not. In the long run I think his magazine's rep is worth way more than 100k. I DO care what an owner/maker of a product does, it affects me when I purchase something. I won't buy something if I know an owner/maker has a lifestyle I don't want to support. I.E. Micheal Jackson albums, etc. I'm sure I'm not the only one. I was/am ready to pay out 500 BTC. I don't see why he won't/wouldn't. He has much more than me to lose in this bet. Your opinion of him? A scammer vs. someone who keeps their word? You have a conflict with which is better? Really? Hm.... |
|
|
|
Matthew is a lot of things but I do think he's honest.
No idea why he made this bet though.
18 pages of chatter about something none of the posters are involved in. You don't understand why I made this bet?  EDIT: Okay now someone involved posts  Well now Matt, when will you pay? What are the conditions? I think its pretty clear that pirate has defaulted. When will you pay? On the 9th. He has until then. Chill. |
|
|
|
I wasn't too skeptical about him paying out when the bets totaled about $10k to $20k, but my skepticism went way up when it his $100k. Honestly I hope he doesn't pay. His reputation is definitely not worth $100k, anyway, let alone $300k
How much is bitcoin magazine's rep worth? You know with him being co-owner and all. Not good for a fledgling magazine to have a scammer on board. Nor is it good for the forum here to have staff that scams as well. This bet affects more than just his reputation. In December 2011, BitTalk Media Ltd. was originally formed with 7 members of the DCAO: Matthew N. Wright as Director of Operations, Mihai Alisie as Director of Marketing, Vitalik Buterin as Editor in Chief, Vicente S. as Director of Photography, Vladimir Marchenko as Chief Technology Officer. http://bitcoinmagazine.net/about-us/With that said. I don't think he'll scam. I think he'll payout as promised if he loses. Guess we'll see. Good Luck Matt. |
|
|
|
Cool story, except I knew his name, birth date, and city of residence before the his BTCST thread made it past the first page. Those who didn't know didn't bother to look.
One question. Have you been paid? No? Yeah, I thought not. |
|
|
|
Gigavps... - All shill, full drama..
Gigavps is a shill. I've come to realize this from his posts about pirate and now this rating. Also, I still can't believe Pirate isn't wearing the scammer tag. How long is it going to take to conclude he is one? He's not paying, we know that. He's welched on even his own terms he set when he shut btcst down, which to me makes Matthew lose his bet by default. WTF? If this were anyone else, I'd suspect they'd have been hit with it on day one. |
|
|
|
Scamming sock puppets = bad
regular sock puppets = who cares?
I agree with this. As long as scamming isn't involved, if people want to be anon when they give their opinions so they are not linked to their business or dealings they have on the forum or in the community in general, let them. All voices should be heard no matter how unpopular those opinions may be. |
|
|
|
Wait, so we are still pretending Pirate is going to pay out? Just checking.
Maybe he'll pay in a relative sense: karma is a bitch. I wish karma was real. Though I'd settle to just see people actually hang this guy from his balls. So we are still sitting at 1 confirmed payment? Or has that number gone up from almost two weeks ago? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101942 |
|
|
|
but I also want to see as many people get their accounts closed and funds paid out as possible before things proceed any further.
Wait, so we are still pretending Pirate is going to pay out? Just checking. |
|
|
|
Summed up in a single gif? This is what it feels like to be on Pirate's boat right now.  |
|
|
|
[19:16] <@pirateat40> Total Accounts Repaid: 21/459 (subject to required information)
Since he's paying out again, it might be a good idea to start a new thread. update: 22 now. This doesn't make sense to me. Does "Repaid" mean paid in full, or just as much as he's planning on paying them? Is he saying that there are 459 accounts that might be paid if they provide "required information" and that he's already paid 21 (or 22)? Or is he saying that he has enough funds to pay back 21 (or 22) of the 459 accounts if they provide the "required information"? That phrase is much too ambiguous for me to understand with any certainty. Pirate has put pressure on PPT operators to turn over their clients information for "legal reasons". This seems to me a game pirate is playing to see if he can create an outrage among PPT bond/account holders to get them to hand over their info so they can be first in "line". I see nobody reporting they have been paid. At all. Yes, but adding "(subject to required information)" as a qualifier doesn't make any sense; either he's paid back 22 accounts or he hasn't. If he's saying that there might be some accounts that won't be paid if they don't cooperate, he should spell it out. I agree. In a roundabout way I think that's what he's doing. He's threatening people with their accounts. "Maybe you'll get them, maybe you won't. I will not tolerate mutiny!" |
|
|
|
[19:16] <@pirateat40> Total Accounts Repaid: 21/459 (subject to required information)
Since he's paying out again, it might be a good idea to start a new thread. update: 22 now. This doesn't make sense to me. Does "Repaid" mean paid in full, or just as much as he's planning on paying them? Is he saying that there are 459 accounts that might be paid if they provide "required information" and that he's already paid 21 (or 22)? Or is he saying that he has enough funds to pay back 21 (or 22) of the 459 accounts if they provide the "required information"? That phrase is much too ambiguous for me to understand with any certainty. Pirate has put pressure on PPT operators to turn over their clients information for "legal reasons". This seems to me a game pirate is playing to see if he can create an outrage among PPT bond/account holders to get them to hand over their info so they can be first in "line". I see nobody reporting they have been paid. At all. |
|
|
|
Even if he doesn't pay, no money is lost. None is gained, but that's not a loss. Nobody's actually risking anything here. (Except their reputations)
You are incorrect. Money will be lost. There are people who made financial decisions based on Matthew's bet acting as a hedge against their possible Pirate losses. Now that's a good point (as I've come to expect from you). But if you make financial decisions based on a bet, I have no sympathy. A bet is not a hedge, it's another risk. It's not a financial decision. It's a gamble. This bet has cost me money if both default. I was proving you wrong. I want no sympathy. I've already said what my concern is. Whether these are fugazi BTC being bet. Like I said I wasn't worried before. I've just been reading a lot of things on Matthew since this bet that have me wondering. This is a thread about discussion on the bet right? Edit: And yes, Matthew has promoted this bet as a way to hedge for a pirate default. It could cost original "investors" of btcst BTC as well, as JoelKatz has pointed out. |
|
|
|
Matthew isnt going to pay, period. Either something extremely unlikely happens or he will wear his scammer tag with pride.
So he burns pirate investors twice. What a nice guy. Even if he doesn't pay, no money is lost. None is gained, but that's not a loss. Nobody's actually risking anything here. (Except their reputations) Lol, what a simpleton way of looking at it. Yes money will be lost. I've bought pirate debt to hedge this bet. I would be in the hole from this if both default. I am also thinking about taking out insurance. Don't know yet. That will cost me. So yes, money will be lost. |
|
|
|
Wait wait wait...you mean...PinkiePie and Bitcoiners, two SomethingAwful trolls don't appreciate me? WHO WOULD HAVE GUESSED THAT. lulz.
Funny thing is, I've never been to that site. I have no idea what it even is, nor do I care. What I do care about is whether you are actually betting with "real" btc as many people have suggested you are not. |
|
|
|
I have to say, after seeing how matthew behaves on IRC and the forums I look at Bitcoin magazine differently...
He should just make a sock puppet account if he wants to act so unprofessional.
Im actually embarrassed for the members of that rag. I wonder why no one has reined him in...
Same. |
|
|
|
Matthew isnt going to pay, period. Either something extremely unlikely happens or he will wear his scammer tag with pride.
So he burns pirate investors twice. What a nice guy. And this does reflect bad on Bitcoin Mag if this is true. Doesn't matter if the company approved of it or not. They've used it in a story already and he is the editor in chief there. Guess we'll see. |
|
|
|
|
He's not paying out.
"(subject to required information)"
lol what a joke.
And with that I got banned from #btcst. lol. Seems to me he's trying to put pressure on PPT managers to turn over the information he has asked for.
Don't give in. Fuck this guy. Seriously.
|
|
|
|
I still have the original version. It's "People so sure of themselves they're willing to piss away money on it" 35k now I would like to state here on behalf of Bitcoin Magazine that Matthew's bet has nothing at all to do with Bitcoin Magazine. This is not something approved by Bitcoin Magazine and images of Bitcoin Magazine placed there are used without consent of Bitcoin Magazine and without consulting with board of directors of Bittalk Media Ltd, ( publisher of Bitcoin Magazine ). I'm not an expert on this but from my understanding with Matthew's bet is that pirate has to pay full interest due to the hour paid. And it is also my understanding that Pirate wanted the interest to stop at 8:30 am this morning Texas time. Do you have a link or a quote for this? It seems I can't log onto #btcst anymore. If this is true, that the interest has stopped. Then Matthew loses the bet. Pirate has yet again broken his payout agreement. Surprise, surprise. both are online, matthew's quote is in his bet thread, and my understanding from pirate is posted in log form on page 29 of the tygrr bond p thread. Yeah, I've already got matthew's quote memorized and screenshotted.  Thanks for the directions to pirate's post. Cheers! |
|
|
|
I registered ##btcst-open on irc.freenode.net in order to have a place where people can chat about the situation with pirateat40 and bitcoin savings and trust without fear of being banned or censored .... people are banned left and right in #btcst for any dissent shown.. and it is a little out of hand. Come chat if you want. Disclaimer: Still, calls for direct violence are not welcome here, as that is silly as well as illegal (or at least against freenode terms of service). But indirect comments such as "i'm selling pitchforks!" are fine Edit: I hope the double hash does not confuse people. ## is required for all non-official channels on freenode.. policy and what not... or as pirateat40 would say "all i can tell you is it is legal stuff" Well I can't even join the chat anymore @ #btcst. What happened? It go private or what? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
