|
[/b]
how much are you charging for this service?
|
|
|
|
Is my government really that hellbent on targeting casinos outside of its jurisdiction?
newsflash: your government is hellbent on targeting everything outside of it's jurisdiction. |
|
|
|
|
for the record, i don't expect this thread to stay online long... fully expect mods to delete random personal attack.
|
|
|
|
I hate squatters.
 |
|
|
|
Identity as a basis for trust is over rated.
|
|
|
|
if the price of Bitcoin drops to $1 in four months and he pays people back the number of Bitcoins owed, does that count as him paying back?
it absolutely would count. 'investing' in bitcoin savings and trust never at any time had anything to do any currency other than BTC. exchange rates with alternate currencies are a totally unrelated issue. |
|
|
|
@pirateat40 | The PPT that didn't' comply
does that mean every single other PPT 'complied'? let's see if their lenders report having coins come in... that's the only thing that matters and i've still seen no evidence of that occurring. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the info guys.
How much can we trust either of ThruCoin or BTCrow? (in terms of BTCs in a single transaction).
just by the way, thrucoin is me. so if you want to know how much to trust 'thrucoin', you can do your due diligence based on 'payb.tc'. |
|
|
|
|
from now until dec 2, it's gradually going to increase to somewhere between $15 and $20.
|
|
|
|
how can he block them?
i don't see how he can stop lenders from telling pirate their own account info.
oh good, now I can tell pirate about my bitcoin max account that had 40k coins in it. I even have a screen shot to prove it.  i wouldn't say lack of verification counts as 'blockage' or censorship. matt said Chaang Noi is refusing to allow his own clients to contact Pirate even if they -want- to. i was wondering how goat can even disallow this. duct tape? |
|
|
|
I think PPT operators should bear in mind that if they choose to negotiate with pirate on behalf of their investors, they'll probably be leaving themselves wide open to liability if the investors are not happy with the outcome or if they do not vigorously pursue any and all means possible to recover their investors' money, up to and including taking legal action against pirate. I'd strongly suggest that the PPT operators seek legal advice regarding their own position should they advise their clients not to deal with pirate directly.
I don't think PPT operators are even considering such a thing. What we're seeing though is outright -blockage- of client information. Chaang Noi is refusing to allow his own clients to contact Pirate even if they -want- to. That's going to make calling my bet a bit difficult to say the least, if everyone got paid except Chaang Noi's clients due to his stubborness.  how can he block them? i don't see how he can stop lenders from telling pirate their own account info. |
|
|
|
Is there a way to make a clickable link that opens the client with the amount of BTC to send and the receiving address?
search: "bitcoin URI" not sure if the satoshi client supports it yet, but i know armory does. |
|
|
|
|
thanks, i care, and look forward to reviewing your work.
|
|
|
|
that is a line in the sad
no, this is a line in the sad: sad |
|
|
|
|
i'm not going to name names, but i can confirm that some accounts in bitcoin max belong to 'deposit takers'.
these may or may not be the deposit takers' personal funds.
|
|
|
|
It's now time to let your PPT OP 'down from his cross' and allow him/her/it to DEFEND the integrity of this community. Thats how it should be defended by you and payb.tc :As bitcoinmax always stated, your coins are lost !, as Trendon Shavers shaves us all. In case the defaulted entity BCST is assuming its liabilities to bitcoinmax or pays out any amount to bitcoinmax, all principal investments are payed back evenly up to the amount deposited. The gained interest of all accounts is put in escrow until further notice. If bitcoinmax liabilities to you are not fully covered by this proceedure and in case BCST pays zilch, i payb.tc, will pact with bitlane to recover what is being able to recover from Trendon Shavers. The interest which i accrued during operation of bitcoinmax up to date is given back to recover your principal investments. As far as it stands, pirate has not option neither right to get your data or information through my hands. Seeing forward to provide further investment possibilities to you in the future. Please comment Yours sincerely.......... to be clear: i am not the author of the above text, and don't know who is. I added some bolding because it gets lost, but basically, he was giving you your statement. no offence to zyk, but he can hardly string an english sentence together, so i doubt he wrote the above passage. hence, i still don't know who the author is. |
|
|
|
[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. would be nice to have 21 people confirming this. were they 100% paid? |
|
|
|
It's now time to let your PPT OP 'down from his cross' and allow him/her/it to DEFEND the integrity of this community. Thats how it should be defended by you and payb.tc : As bitcoinmax always stated, your coins are lost !, as Trendon Shavers shaves us all. In case the defaulted entity BCST is assuming its liabilities to bitcoinmax or pays out any amount to bitcoinmax, all principal investments are payed back evenly up to the amount deposited. The gained interest of all accounts is put in escrow until further notice. If bitcoinmax liabilities to you are not fully covered by this proceedure and in case BCST pays zilch, i payb.tc, will pact with bitlane to recover what is being able to recover from Trendon Shavers. The interest which i accrued during operation of bitcoinmax up to date is given back to recover your principal investments. As far as it stands, pirate has not option neither right to get your data or information through my hands. Seeing forward to provide further investment possibilities to you in the future. Please comment Yours sincerely.......... to be clear: i am not the author of the above text, and don't know who is. |
|
|
|
It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.
In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.
This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.
actually, i have already stated that. sorry this thread is so disorganised. don't really have much time to write an essay in the OP. i originally wrote the order of the payouts: - those that requested withdrawals before BST closed. - principal balance up until bst closed, in order of user id (account age) - interest accrued after bst closed, in order of user id (account age) all that pretty much assumed full payout. if there's a partial payout, and funds are distributed via a %, then it doesn't matter if interest+principal is paid in one tx or two, it'll still add up to the same amount. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
