|
Hello, nice to see you're back, I hope you don't forget that you owe me quite a considerable amount!
|
|
|
|
|
Because you both guys didn't find a solution that was satisfactory to both sides, I by sole discretion but relying on your agreement as the sole basis for my decision , apply clause 3. The funds are returned to the addresses specified by you.
Txid a7df7c18c96af37971fb2389551d673ccae8869ce6b6e0362836c1c8acf7c341
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Here is my argument for why the bet should continue until formal resolution is met as per the terms: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FbP3PlREppO8gXzvb_qcKC-N4rHpzXM15XB2oCcFoWA/edit?usp=sharingI have also included evidence that can be used as context to better interpret the wording of the terms and the intention behind them. Based on the above, I believe the correct decision here would be to continue the bet either until an off-chain burn tax is implemented, Terra on-chain governance signals to repeal the request to exchanges, or Jan 1. I have nothing further to say and you are welcome to make your decision. I trust that you will make the right choice based on the facts. Alternatively, if you wish to follow DW's decision when he makes it, that works too. Either way is fine by me. Thanks for your time. The situation is confusing and complicated.. @nubcake_MeoW_ since your original agreement has a some conflict between clause, maybe this proposal of FatManTerrais fair enough for you.. I believe the context, spirit & intention behind the bet make this a clear decision. As the bet was placed before the burn tax’s implementation, the terms clearly referred to the tax at a certain stage and did not give carte blanche to an escape hatch as proven by the public messages. The community is still actively signalling for exchanges to implement the tax via on-chain governance, which gives me the impression that the void request is in bad faith. I believe the fair decision here would be to allow the bet to continue until formal resolution is found as per the terms & spirit.
Even though this is not mandated by the terms, which only require a >0.9% burn tax, I will make two concessions out of good faith because I believe they fall in line with the spirit of our agreement. One: despite the void clause only referring to the proposal phase, if Terra Classic governance formally repeals their currently active request to exchanges to implement the off-chain burn tax, I will agree to a void. Two: if a major exchange implements an off-chain burn tax of 0.2% or more per trade, I will resolve the bet as a win for nubcake. I think this concession fairly reflects both the change in circumstances and our original common understanding insofar as our intentions behind this bet.
|
|
|
|
in my opinion, the third clause of the contract has taken place, and even the further events foreseen in the other clauses will not cancel it Hey zazarb. nubcake is attempting to get his money back before the bet has officially resolved (no exchange has implemented the off-chain burn tax yet). The void clause referred to the tax in its proposal phase. If the burn tax was removed or reduced at this stage, the bet would be voided. After our initial agreement, the 1.2% burn tax was activated on-chain, thus activating our bet. Although the written term leaves some ambiguity, the spirit and intention behind the terms is evident. The timing of the agreement (pre-activation) makes the intention clear as well.
As we have a disagreement concerning the interpretation of this term, I have requested an arbitration decision from DW, the second escrow provider. I asked nubcake whether he would like to open a separate arbitration process with you or roll with DW's decision for both sets of coins. He refused to answer and blocked me on Discord.
In my opinion, the simplest way for you would be to follow DW's decision on the matter. If DW decides to refund the bet, you can do the same here, and if he decides to keep the bet open until it formally resolves, you can follow suit as well. This way, you won't have to review our arguments. Alternatively, you are welcome to arbitrate independently. I am fine with whatever you and nubcake are okay with.
Apologies for the inconvenience.
Hi Zarzarb, In an effort to keep this simple, it is now confirmed that: - Terra Classic governance has altered the on-chain burn tax to be less than 0.9% - There is a dispute This invokes clauses 3 and 6. Quoting the original terms: 3. If Terra Classic governance alters the on-chain burn tax to be less than 0.9%, or removes it entirely, the bet is considered void and both parties are refunded less an equal contribution to the escrow fees. 6. In the event of a dispute, the escrow provider will determine the ‘winner’ on their sole discretion but must rely on this agreement as the sole basis for their decision. [emphasis added] In the event of dispute, no opinions, interpretations or further submissions from FatMan or myself should be considered as stipulated in the original terms. Please determine decide the matter 'on your sole discretion' and 'relying on the original agreement as the sole basis for decision'. Please confirm your intended action and decision in due course by reply. I sincerely regret that it is necessary to invoke clause 6 and your intervention. I exhaused extensive genuine efforts to resolve the matter with FM before posting. Many thanks |
|
|
|
LUNC (Terra Classic) governance proposal #5234 has passed reducing the tax from 1.2% to 0.2% (see https://station.terra.money/proposal/5234) Clause 3 states: 3. If Terra Classic governance alters the on-chain burn tax to be less than 0.9%, or removes it entirely, the bet is considered void and both parties are refunded less an equal contribution to the escrow fees. I also note clause 6: 6. In the event of a dispute, the escrow provider will determine the ‘winner’ on their sole discretion but must rely on this agreement as the sole basis for their decision. [Emphasis added] zazarb kindly confirm by reply that the refunds will be processed and approximately when the transfers will be completed. Many thanks Hello, with your link I can't see "governance proposal #5234". in any case, I'm waiting Fatmanterra comment or confirmation. |
|
|
|
When you become a high-ranking forum member with a good reputation, you can use your forum account as collateral for a loan. Forum loans are very hard to get, but if you qualify for one and make regular payments, it can help you build your credit history.
"forum account as collateral"- these days it is unlikely, it's a forgotten story  |
|
|
|
Loan Amount: 0.5 BTC Reason for Taking out a Loan: Personal Amount to be repaid: 0.605 Repayment Date: December 31 2022 (3 months or sooner) Bitcoin address: bc1q0m770s58x06rqkvyvlcxujpy039uue0m0nszgs Signed message: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
This is Dabs, today is September 27 2022 and I ask a loan from zazarb in 3 months period with repayment of 0.605 BTC.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=E6LR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Amount has been sent, please repay to following address 1BxrYeixq8wTq3mVkvZEuepQVidA9g3fh7 |
|
|
|
Loan Amount: 0.25 BTCReason for Taking out a Loan: The reason for the loan is to purchase this tickets https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414532 to leave Russia as soon as possible Amount to be repaid: 0.27 BTCRepayment Date: 26 September 2022 when I receive my salaryType of Collateral: NoneBitcoin Address: 3Kxdbq8BhRg6A4bsmUjyCv9b6UN5jbYeEM Denied |
|
|
|
Many thanks to both of you.
When I win, please pay out to bc1qj2r3ual3ve7n5q4wkgnf87ct673zk4ww56ydvn.
Under no circumstances will I change this address. If I attempt to, assume my account to be compromised.
Good luck!
Quoted |
|
|
|
Regarding the possible increase, coming back to you on it: we decided to split the escrow between two providers to spread the risk given the size of the transaction.
No problem, do what you think is best for them. |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Here will be the escrow agreement fort betting, between FatManTerra and nubcake_MeoW_ Terms of deal in quoted message: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161170.msg60912731#msg60912731Escrow address: 1zazarbojD21aRu2dpFYz7KxFDKgwSDtK Participants please fund the above escrow address with 2 BTC( 1BTC each) Upon confirmation of winner and review , I will release a total of 2 BTC ( escrow fee 1% and transaction fee will be deducted) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.1.13 Comment: https://keybase.io/cryptowsBcBAABCgAGBQJjHCbRAAoJEEesS+GBgNwF/aAIAL9SZ1XlSD1OJwlHCz6d/JCL nQ0fRD6FmuHZvwTqSDwXhek1Yefad/DaC12AXCx6NzKtt4BmrU1C4M0Iv3OEKtVi 75WqWboCoGxZbtCj/yRuBzeSMbz5MWKkYD/wWwAzJJ3gvFzfpdY0dbJ+8weQ85Ru iAvlv0pkbXrKqip+pc9CS9NujBMU1pwB6EEOLh87qTVqRV3KtX14grp9w45avcwF ANsiqv905Imrqz6QqEOfDovBWSYCoNc9wXDOMn24zLIDdFJA2OaVnizr/PZu+Nth kYS2v+phGZl/Lw1Hu1FXhA0KNSPJjOSNM4NFqxgAyVVYFRKHoKVjR8ieB8393DQ= =V9aN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Signature verified and BTC sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ddb439f5c03a82a0273568411b0c222cb7e763574fdaf80adac161197fbfbf1bThank you. Confirmed as received Hey, the two of us would like to double up on the same bet. 2 BTC each instead of 1 BTC each. Would you be okay with that? (I'll send you an extra bitcoin and nubcake will send you a total of two.) Let me know. Thanks. yes, you can do it. Apologies, I jumped the gun on this one. nubcake would prefer for me to consult other escrow services to spread out counterparty risk, so we'll stick to the 1 BTC with you for now. If that doesn't pan out as expected, I will let you know. Sorry, hope that's okay. No problem |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Here will be the escrow agreement fort betting, between FatManTerra and nubcake_MeoW_ Terms of deal in quoted message: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161170.msg60912731#msg60912731Escrow address: 1zazarbojD21aRu2dpFYz7KxFDKgwSDtK Participants please fund the above escrow address with 2 BTC( 1BTC each) Upon confirmation of winner and review , I will release a total of 2 BTC ( escrow fee 1% and transaction fee will be deducted) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.1.13 Comment: https://keybase.io/cryptowsBcBAABCgAGBQJjHCbRAAoJEEesS+GBgNwF/aAIAL9SZ1XlSD1OJwlHCz6d/JCL nQ0fRD6FmuHZvwTqSDwXhek1Yefad/DaC12AXCx6NzKtt4BmrU1C4M0Iv3OEKtVi 75WqWboCoGxZbtCj/yRuBzeSMbz5MWKkYD/wWwAzJJ3gvFzfpdY0dbJ+8weQ85Ru iAvlv0pkbXrKqip+pc9CS9NujBMU1pwB6EEOLh87qTVqRV3KtX14grp9w45avcwF ANsiqv905Imrqz6QqEOfDovBWSYCoNc9wXDOMn24zLIDdFJA2OaVnizr/PZu+Nth kYS2v+phGZl/Lw1Hu1FXhA0KNSPJjOSNM4NFqxgAyVVYFRKHoKVjR8ieB8393DQ= =V9aN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Signature verified and BTC sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ddb439f5c03a82a0273568411b0c222cb7e763574fdaf80adac161197fbfbf1bThank you. Confirmed as received Hey, the two of us would like to double up on the same bet. 2 BTC each instead of 1 BTC each. Would you be okay with that? (I'll send you an extra bitcoin and nubcake will send you a total of two.) Let me know. Thanks. yes, you can do it. |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Here will be the escrow agreement fort betting, between FatManTerra and nubcake_MeoW_ Terms of deal in quoted message: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161170.msg60912731#msg60912731Escrow address: 1zazarbojD21aRu2dpFYz7KxFDKgwSDtK Participants please fund the above escrow address with 2 BTC( 1BTC each) Upon confirmation of winner and review , I will release a total of 2 BTC ( escrow fee 1% and transaction fee will be deducted) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.1.13 Comment: https://keybase.io/cryptowsBcBAABCgAGBQJjHCbRAAoJEEesS+GBgNwF/aAIAL9SZ1XlSD1OJwlHCz6d/JCL nQ0fRD6FmuHZvwTqSDwXhek1Yefad/DaC12AXCx6NzKtt4BmrU1C4M0Iv3OEKtVi 75WqWboCoGxZbtCj/yRuBzeSMbz5MWKkYD/wWwAzJJ3gvFzfpdY0dbJ+8weQ85Ru iAvlv0pkbXrKqip+pc9CS9NujBMU1pwB6EEOLh87qTVqRV3KtX14grp9w45avcwF ANsiqv905Imrqz6QqEOfDovBWSYCoNc9wXDOMn24zLIDdFJA2OaVnizr/PZu+Nth kYS2v+phGZl/Lw1Hu1FXhA0KNSPJjOSNM4NFqxgAyVVYFRKHoKVjR8ieB8393DQ= =V9aN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Signature verified and BTC sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ddb439f5c03a82a0273568411b0c222cb7e763574fdaf80adac161197fbfbf1bThank you. Confirmed as received |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Here will be the escrow agreement fort betting, between FatManTerra and nubcake_MeoW_ Terms of deal in quoted message: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161170.msg60912731#msg60912731Escrow address: 1zazarbojD21aRu2dpFYz7KxFDKgwSDtK Participants please fund the above escrow address with 2 BTC( 1BTC each) Upon confirmation of winner and review , I will release a total of 2 BTC ( escrow fee 1% and transaction fee will be deducted) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.1.13 Comment: https://keybase.io/cryptowsBcBAABCgAGBQJjHCbRAAoJEEesS+GBgNwF/aAIAL9SZ1XlSD1OJwlHCz6d/JCL nQ0fRD6FmuHZvwTqSDwXhek1Yefad/DaC12AXCx6NzKtt4BmrU1C4M0Iv3OEKtVi 75WqWboCoGxZbtCj/yRuBzeSMbz5MWKkYD/wWwAzJJ3gvFzfpdY0dbJ+8weQ85Ru iAvlv0pkbXrKqip+pc9CS9NujBMU1pwB6EEOLh87qTVqRV3KtX14grp9w45avcwF ANsiqv905Imrqz6QqEOfDovBWSYCoNc9wXDOMn24zLIDdFJA2OaVnizr/PZu+Nth kYS2v+phGZl/Lw1Hu1FXhA0KNSPJjOSNM4NFqxgAyVVYFRKHoKVjR8ieB8393DQ= =V9aN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
|
Hi Zazarb, I've noted Fatman's below post and I agree. Many thanks @FatMan, you’ve offered a bet, and I @nubcake_MeoW_ accepted, that we both contribute 1BTC with the winner taking all proceeds (2BTC minus escrow fees) The bet originated as a response to your following statement 08/09/2022 on TR discord: No major exchange will ever support a 1.2% burn tax for off-chain trades. It will simply never happen and there's no point talking about it because it's a silly idea. If you disagree, I am happy to bet on it. You maintain the statement will prove true, and if it does you win the bet. I maintain the statement will not prove true, and if it does not, I win the bet. For clarity on both sides, we have discussed the key points and terms in detail and agreed as follows: 1. ‘Major exchanges’ are defined by you as: Binance, Kraken, KuCoin, Huobi, Coinbase, FTX, Gemini 2. A burn tax is defined as a mandatory >0.9% fee taken out of amounts traded on LUNC spot trading pairs with the intention of burning the proceeds. This definition only includes a tax levied on amounts traded internally on the exchange and does not include on-chain burns (ie. burns caused by withdrawals from or deposits to the exchange). Non-exhaustive examples of nubcake winning: - Binance increases their spot trading fee to >0.9% and forces it on users across all LUNC spot trades and sends it to the burn wallet. - Binance automatically deducts >0.9% of every LUNC purchase's proceeds to send to the burn wallet. - If the recent MEXC burn described in the following link had been implemented by one of the exchanges noted in this bet https://support.mexc.com/hc/en-001/articles/10122048174105. The spirit of the bet is that if someone trades $100 of LUNC, the exchange takes >$0.9 (this number is X) to burn and gives ($100 - X) to the user on the other end of the trade, regardless of how it is specifically implemented. 3. If Terra Classic governance alters the on-chain burn tax to be less than 0.9%, or removes it entirely, the bet is considered void and both parties are refunded less an equal contribution to the escrow fees. 4. The ‘burn tax’ must be announced by one of the above listed CEX before 01/01/2023 and implemented no later than 01/01/2024 for nubcake to ‘win’. If this does not occur FatMan ‘wins’. In the case that a ‘win’ becomes clearly apparent, or is otherwise agreed by the parties, the proceeds of the bet are to be immediately paid to the winning party, less any escrow fees which are to be taken from the proceeds. 5. The parties will organise separately the escrow arrangements and each pay their 1BTC into escrow within 4 days of the escrow arrangements being agreed. 6. In the event of a dispute, the escrow provider will determine the ‘winner’ on their sole discretion but must rely on this agreement as the sole basis for their decision. Here are the terms we both agreed to. The executive summary is if the Terra Classic chain implements a burn tax of 0.9% or higher per transaction, the bet becomes active - I win if no major exchange implements a burn tax on trades and nubcake wins if any major exchange does (refer to the above message for finer details). If the Terra Classic chain does not implement such a burn tax, the bet is voided (you can keep the escrow fee and return the bets to us). It's unlikely that there will be a dispute (it will be quite clear to both of us who won), but in the event that one of us acts in bad faith or if the outcome is ambiguous, please refer to the above message in order to determine who won. If this works for you, please post your address. nubcake will post here as well to confirm their account. We will send the money to you within four days from the time you post your address. Thank you. Quoted |
|
|
|
Hello!
I am looking for an escrow service. I am betting that certain exchanges won't implement a certain policy (namely a 1.2% burn tax on LUNC trades). The other party is betting at least one exchange will implement such a policy before Jan 1 2023. We are looking to bet 1 BTC each. The winner will receive 2 BTC (minus escrow fees).
Would you be willing to escrow such a deal? If so, what would your fee be?
If you are willing to do this, let me know!
Thank you.
FatMan
Hi, yes, I probably can do it, my fee 1% |
|
|
|
Do you accept domains for on-going business as collateral?
Sorry, no. |
|
|
|
bc1qc94q5ut44usg89y4mkuszhj6x7vktuh4fyk9f7
Want up to 400 $
At 20%
Next Thursday
Post sent amount dollar and btc
Ty
Sent 0.019 BTC via txid f72f79934778bf3a8376ff7935fcbcd974addcaba124c796ab97e493a295f3dd, please repay to 3EzR7Qx1FH93XUiHPSvyuuPFXjbpimhqSm |
|
|
|
repaying now
Despairo
0.020538
bc1qp3pttr8zx5yw8qkqd752dlfqvrz38227zyyww7
DireWolfM14
0.0184
bc1q90yhfa8uw75cksvdv5zl2zztq5axvlvnuc3c27
zazarb
1BxrYeixq8wTq3mVkvZEuepQVidA9g3fh7
0.011826324
//
0.050764324
Confirmed as received, thank you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
