... But, do you really think that this issue/fraud/mismanagement is really the death knell of bitcoin? That's what I took from one of your posts.
NO way, but it's a disease, and things that don't kill us don't always make us stronger. |
|
|
|
...you're just a fucking jack-ov that likes to speak negatively about people and bitcoin...
This Neoscam is as much about Bitcoin as a child molesting priest is about Christianity. The thing that pisses me off is Bitcoin is dragged down into the gutter just like Christianity -- assholes use it, it BAD! |
|
|
|
To sum up: Uninsured pegged accounts with all the drawbacks of conventional banks + uninsured. Extra fees for using Bitcoin. Not a bank.  You keep coming back to the pegged accounts. That's the only part that had the disadvantages of a bank. I'm talking about the rest of their activities. Also: even the pegged accounts could have limited counterparty risk to the peg itself, with the peg itself being conditional on the BTC being released to Neo. Then they still couldn't have run off with your BTC. Look, i made tried to make it clear with the "saving kittens" bit. If a slaughterhouse lists "saving kittens" as a part of its business model, it neither stops being a slaughterhouse, nor does it explain how it intends to make money by saving kittens. And yes, many hypotheticals could be created where Neo is a good thing. Sure, money could be made with honest money services -- it happens. Unfortunately, nothing in the Neo prospectus describes how it plans to go about doing that. Don't send your coin to strangers who make nice sounding vague promises. |
|
|
|
You claimed that this "investment" was not a disaster for u.
I offered an apology. Apparently losing money and bad press 4 Bitcoin are a desirable outcome 4 u.
Where do you see a problem?
Well, from the onset of this exchange between you and I, I clearly stated that we're both working off of incomplete information. Nevertheless, we seem to be holding this conversation from different starting points. Your above post is totally wrong and another twisting of the issue. You're like a professional spinner, either intentionally or unintentionally. Nah. Moar like ur a professional rube who don't quite logic. |
|
|
|
Care to sum up their goals, along with how profit was going to be generated by achieving those goals? The TL;DR i could see is all of the bad qualities of a bank ("running off with the fiat") were compounded by "the customer is 100% uninsured."
That only applies to the pegged accounts. For BTC accounts the promise was Bitcoin payments with the convenience of electronic euro payments, including protection from theft, combined with a protection from bail-ins. In order to run a profit they'd have to charge fees, just like banks. To sum up: Uninsured pegged accounts with all the drawbacks of conventional banks + uninsured. Extra fees for using Bitcoin. Not a bank. |
|
|
|
If losing money while contributing to mainstream negativity is your idea of success, I apologise.
I would say you haven't an idea of bitcoin's capabilities and breadth, but I don't think that's true. Oh, so now that I'm posting on a message board and holding "conversations" regarding a matter within the bitcoin community AND not speaking entirely positive on the matter, that's ... that's the problem. Ok? You aren't even sticking to your original assertion from your preceding post. You aren't maintaining any consistency, Chop. In your previous post you stated that this is "disastrous" for me, I rebutted the only way possible at this time, yet you don't acknowledge it and reply with some notion that because I'm here posting in a less-than-positive manner means bitcoin is doomed? I don't understand? I'm not going to be blind to the issues or problems with bitcoin and/or Neo & Bee - as in, stick my head in the sand. Is that what you're advocating? Of course not. So, again, your post is illogical. You claimed that this "investment" was not a disaster for u. I offered an apology. Apparently losing money and bad press 4 Bitcoin are a desirable outcome 4 u. Where do you see a problem? P.S: Taking the outlandishly improbable hypothetical -- NeoBee succeeds beyond your wildest dreams: Your "investment" could now be bought at a tiny fraction of the coin you have invested. Tiny. So there is no question of losses here, only whether your losses are total. |
|
|
|
@mmeijeri: As I said, "...everything other than..."
I wasn't sure you had the right number of negatives in there. I don't understand how you can complain Neo was going to have the bad properties of banks. Their goals were sound. Care to sum up their goals, along with how profit was going to be generated by achieving those goals? The TL;DR i could see is all of the bad qualities of a bank ("running off with the fiat") were compounded by "the customer is 100% uninsured." |
|
|
|
I'm not interested in your motives -- this is finance, not Christianity. The results, on the other hand, are disastrous for you and detrimental to Bitcoin as a whole.
You are interested in my motives as evidenced by one of your previous posts. I'm not even going to go find it because you obviously don't remember. Obviously. This is quite bad. I agree. That's one of the reasons I created an account. But, how do you know they're "disastrous" for me? You don't know that, because, uh, it isn't...? If losing money while contributing to mainstream negativity is your idea of success, I apologize. @mmeijeri: As I said, "...everything other than..." |
|
|
|
@mmeijeri: If Neo said that along with being a bank, it would also rescue kittens, would that make Neo any less of a bank?
Well, I'd say they wouldn't really have been a bank. Or are you referring to the pegged accounts? I'm referring to everything other than the ridiculous "because having your own bitcoin wallet is hard" wallets. |
|
|
|
TL;DR: 1. Repeat ad nauseum that I am illogical and offensive. 2. Provide no substance to back those claims. 3.  4. PROFIT. *I understand that my pointing out the absurdity of what you have done seems mean. I have tried logic and reason -- those fail with NeoBee investors. I later realized my folly -- I was trying to *explain* to the rats *why* certain behavior was undesirable. I'm now trying simple Pavlovian conditioning. You're human. What more do you need? Maybe your posts that twist the circumstances like the mainstream news? Good one, dude/tte. You make the point exquisitely with the above post. You can't even address your inability to understand why I invested in Neo & Bee. I'm not interested in your motives -- this is finance, not Christianity. The results, on the other hand, are disastrous for you and detrimental to Bitcoin as a whole. Please stop what you're doing. Do not want. BZZZZT!!!! |
|
|
|
TL;DR: 1. Repeat ad nauseum that I am illogical and offensive. 2. Provide no substance to back those claims. 3. 4. PROFIT. *I understand that my pointing out the absurdity of what you have done seems mean. I have tried logic and reason -- those fail with NeoBee investors. I later realized my folly -- I was trying to *explain* to the rats *why* certain behavior traits were undesirable. I'm now trying simple Pavlovian conditioning. |
|
|
|
So very unlikely that the boards came from Hashfast  |
|
|
|
|
@mmeijeri: If Neo said that along with being a bank, it would also rescue kittens, would that make Neo any less of a bank?
|
|
|
|
...In terms of removing the shackles of usury/banksters...
>hates banksters. >sends coin to a bankster wannabee to start a bank. Smart. Touche. Although, I don't think that's an entirely accurate characterization, but more a twisting of the issue and circumstances. Maybe you know more than I do, but we all work on different and incomplete information - hence, the illogical human. Hence, your illogical snipe at me. Illogical? As in giving your money to a bankster WannaBee to fund a bank because you hate banksters? The most interesting aspect of Bitcoin is it doesn't need banks and banksters to function. And you are eager to fund a bank because profit. |
|
|
|
...
Liquidity injection can easily be solved with an equity sale...
Not even a speedball injection will make this dead pony sit up. Just stop. "Herp Rating Agency" I'd rather take Derpy's financial advice  |
|
|
|
...In terms of removing the shackles of usury/banksters...
>hates banksters. >sends coin to a bankster wannabee to start a bank. Smart. |
|
|
|
...
the problem is that people care too much about the "FUD." The FUD didn't make the coins disappear. The FUD didn't stop the people who walked into the branch from opening accounts.
... Another problem is things labeled "FUD" turning out to be accurate accounts of reality. |
|
|
|
...This suicide fest has just got to stop.
you are most certainly spot on there, but nothing is ever exactly perfect... you'd still be driving those roads with other shitty drivers who might decide on a good ol car crash and take you along with em... on the other hand occasionally some of those "jumpers" happen to sprout wings and fly to the moon. You'd probably have found plenty fault in AM before their massive success (and perhaps find fault now), but the punt paid handsomely for many, and probably will do again ... Sure. There are outliers who sprout wings and go to the moon (again, you overlook minor details, like the absurdity of winged flight in outer space, making your plans junk). AM [was] one. On the other hand, suggesting that jumping off highway overpasses is a reasonable substitute for a space program... sure, there are lots of problems with this picture, but considering it belongs in the realm of imagination I'm happy to paint my own picture that may not fit with yours. After all a proportion (large or small?) of the jumpers in your original must be drivers too, so that analogy falls flat from the outset and AM [is] still in existence last I checked, with a gradually increasing probability of further (if more restrained) success this year Again, you are assuming too much. Nowhere did I say that the jumpers were also drivers, and nowhere did I suggest that driving to the moon is possible. My analogy's fine. As far as outliers like AM, they're outliers. Even Three-Card Monte games have winners, but don't mistake getting roped into these games for investing. Different thing. Edit: Even with outliers like AM, holders of various associated stock offerings (which is what's being discussed here) didn't always profit. Take TAT's passthrough on Havelock:  |
|
|
|
...This suicide fest has just got to stop.
you are most certainly spot on there, but nothing is ever exactly perfect... you'd still be driving those roads with other shitty drivers who might decide on a good ol car crash and take you along with em... on the other hand occasionally some of those "jumpers" happen to sprout wings and fly to the moon. You'd probably have found plenty fault in AM before their massive success (and perhaps find fault now), but the punt paid handsomely for many, and probably will do again ... Sure. There are outliers who sprout wings and go to the moon (again, you overlook minor details, like the absurdity of winged flight in outer space, making your plans junk). AM [was] one. On the other hand, suggesting that jumping off highway overpasses is a reasonable substitute for a space program... |
|
|
|
|
@NanoAkron: Cyprus Mail is no longer a credible source? Or any other news outlet? You will never get mathematically rigorous proofs of NeoBee being a scam, that's simply not how life works. If Danny came out and said "I scammered U so long suckaz," you would undoubtedly interpret that as a forced statement and continue raging at me.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
