For now the romney event complety overshadows both pirate and bitfloor, we will know in 2-3 days if there is a followup how it is regarded, etc...

Until that has played out the bear market is suspended imo.

The story got picked up quickly by Arstechnica, C-Net et all.

I don't think it will have much of an effect on price.

All this does is remind everyone that security is very important.

and the users of bitfloor lost some coins. so.... they MIGHT wana buy back in when they get their USD back from bitfloor

I can't.
If you draw trendlines they usually fail in predictive power unless they are linear, the only explanation I have is crowd psychology. Other than that it seems completely random...

I don't have any specific method.
When you draw lines, channels, fibs, e.t.c. you use the extremes.
I don't recomment any entry or exit points.
I just try to keep it simple and not overanalyse.

I still think that pirate will not sell his bitcoins in the near future.

The price could tank regardless, but not as steep more like we had last year after 30, it could still accelerate at some point from panic sellers but no fractional digits crazyness. As of how low... idk, just this you can draw a linear trendline under the price from 0.9 to 2 and I don't think that would be broken.

Good guy.. I would be on a rampage if I were in his shoes....

Sure, I understand that people fall for them, and there is a gray zone between commonplace returns and what-sort-of-idiot-do-you-take-me-for returns where I can see myself falling for such a scam as well. What baffles me is people who still believe that BTCST wasn't a ponzi. Some of them even appear to have accepted that they will never see a single satoshi, yet they come up with alternative explanations of what could have gone wrong. These are usually accompanied by the statement that no-one can prove that it was a ponzi.

Now, I am not asking for proof that it wasn't a ponzi. I am just asking for evidence. Any single scrap of evidence, however circumstantial. Is there any reason to believe that it was not a ponzi? Is there a single aspect of the scheme or of Pirate's behaviour which is atypical for a ponzi? Or is all of this wishful thinking (even from people who were allegedly not invested in BTCST)?

Instead of worrying about how to go after people like pirate, how about worrying about how stupid people are to fall for such a thing in the first place?

If you give your money to someone you never met, who won't even tell you how he is investing it, but claims unrealistic returns, than frankly, you deserve to lose your money.

I thing because they are simple they are somehow self explained

Pirate: is there a possibility he is already priced in? The scam has become pretty obvious to most by now.

It's a hypothesis, thus no 100% proof. Still I can imagine that given the long-term optimism on Bitcoin's value some might consider the dip in question one of the last really good opportunities to get in - 'all' in (worth an extra transfer).

Interestingly we're going green right now (48h) so either the theory is:
- simply false
- correct but self-destructing since people are buying in anticipation, effectively erasing any 'all-in' incentives the Tuesday investors might have had to transfer big money.