That's a great jpeg.  Consider it stolen!   

Yes, you rang?  I came as soon as I heard!   

Smoothie, all the info you needed was in the OP.  You just chose to not use your brain before engaging your mouth.

TECSHARE has better things to do than teach you how to use the Google.

Since you are so desperate to be useful by providing unsolicited advice, why not remind people to use escrow when in doubt, instead of spreading FUD and accusing reputable traders of fraud?  

Me too!   

The countdown to 7990 isn't over until I have my fleet upgraded and see shares accumulating at BTCGuild ~100% faster than before.

zerokwel is not a sucker, rather it is you who is a sucker for swallowing your paranoia heedless of all evidence to the contrary:

1.  TECSHARE is a reputable trader of silver for litecoin, with plenty of positive feedback from other established forum members.  But in smoothie-world they are all socks.   

2.  Swiss of Utah is a well known foundry, as a simple google search will demonstrate.  But in smoothie-world "IT COULD MIGHT STILL POSSIBLY BE A SCAM!!!1!"   

3.  The photo shows that the bar in question is imprinted with the key phrase "FINE SILVER."  But in smoothie-world that fact just proves that TECSHARE is dishonest.   

4.  smoothie spreads FUD by crapping in TECSHARE's thread, but is too cowardly to present solid evidence for his ridiculous accusations by creating a thread in the proper venue, which is the Scam Accusations board.   

In conclusion, smoothie = maroon; Q.E.D.   

Oh brother.   

Look more closely at the bar.  See the "R" under the U in Utah?  That's the end of the key phrase "FINE SILVER."   

Here is one in better condition with a more legible imprint.

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/11-18oz-silver-swiss-utah-flat-bar-151528253

I'm tempted to buy the bar and test it, just to rub smoothie's stupid stubborn face in it, but no amount evidence would ever be sufficient.  He'd just keep moving the goalposts, from doubt to skepticism to nihilism and finally to solipsism.  Whatta maroon!   

So you're going to double down on the FUD and start accusing TECSHARE of being a scammer.  Typical Smoothie.  Start a thread in the Scam Accusations citing evidence, or please STFU.   

Smoothie, it is my pleasure to introduce you to my good friend Google:

http://bit.ly/NZQHNW

"Was that so hard?"   

they say "no" but they mean "yes"

that's why there is no more tradehill 

Great idea, SX is tons of fun.   

Let's sell a homebrew + tater tots for BTC1!   

Don't you have to log in to an account for that to run?

We've put pirate where others won't play with him, in the scammer tag category.  Close enough?

I am all 3 (or is it 4?) of those people!

There is no way to prove payb.tc, the operator of the BitcoinMax PPT, knew or did not know the nature of pirate's operation.

That doesn't matter; the reasons payb.tc is a scammer are that he

1) refused to recognize the reality of the BS&T default, preferring to remain mired in the past and demand full payment

2) refused to comply in good faith with pirate's request for PPT account information

3) refused to comply with his own BitcoinMax account holders' requests that their account info be passed through to pirate

4) suddenly proclaimed an 'all-or-nothing' stance towards pirate, despite having been willing to trust him previously, only after the default was announced


Payb.tc, next time both your PPT account holders and pirate ask you to do something (such as pass their PPT account info through to pirate) DO IT.

I'll take that to mean "Yes, you may continue using FC4B despite DeathAndTaxes' hurt feelings."

Post deleted, thanks!

Edit: I know you can't stop and don't need to trust me given I am required to deposit first.  The question was whether or not you *wanted* to me to, given my indulgence of Matthew the Evil Scammer.  Since this is the "Support Thread" it seemed like the appropriate venue for such an inquiry.  

You are correct Yolocoin!  It's nice to see some people are capable of replacing the batteries in their sarcasm detectors in a timely fashion.

Christ bitcoinBull, do I have to spell it out for you?  I mean, even more than it was already spelled out several times during the course of Matt's bet's drama?

Clues for the Clueless Volume XXII
1) Matt is a minor and can't legally sign a contract
2) Matt had not visible means of repayment
3) Matt is a jocular, arguably immature fellow who likes to make his points via escalation
4) NO ESCROW (yes I am screaming that)

Need I go on?

Dude, awesome!     

Even our private servers have been giving me "not providing work fast enough" messages, so this will really help!

Congratulations on answering your own question, and in the affirmative to boot.  I haven't seen an ad hominem strawman get tackled like that since the 1984 Superbowl!

But all that has nothing to do with the fact that Matt's "bet" was obviously a 100% trollish prank and people were saying so all along, only to be ignored by the gambling addicts.

Wouldn't that be nice?

Unfortunately you are asking far too much of our board mates.  

They are such silly ponies, if you tell them to get over it, they'll rant and rave and put you on ignore for having the temerity to disagree with them.

And then you have the wannabe casino-enforcers like Death&Taxes.  He had no skin in the game, but still insists on butting in and sitting in judgement of all who aren't having a cow over a well-timed, poignant prank.

We can't divine what Matt's true intentions originally were.  Thankfully, we don't need need to.   

It was sufficient to notice that he was making wagers involving (well, invoking since no escrow) amounts of bitcoin too large to be reasonably rectified with his public persona.

Everybody knows you can't cheat an honest man.



Or as The Streets put it, "You can't con an honest Jon."   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTB929OoqI4