Hi Joel,  I'll have to add this, but do you believe the Government always tells you the truth about what they're doing with your money?

That's unfair - they print money and rely on new tax payers to pay off the old ones.  That's so obviously a Ponzi scheme it can't be one.

Micon, thank you for your concern.  However, I am sure you can appreciate every time you play a hand of poker you might win or lose.  In this case (actually in several cases) I put up small stakes to see what would happen.  In the same way, I might go to a movie and at the end I may have received my money's worth, but I don't get my money back.

Just for the record, I am not endorsing RustyRyan's deposits, and only threw in a few coins to see how it runs.  i.e. research funding.

And, to herald the other change - when this kicked off it was based around a deposit taking/lending coin model.  Obviously people are doing other things with coins on deposit, so the bad-debt metric is going to get replaced with something more closely related to the stated use of the coins, including how transparently that is disclosed.

Yes, and I suggest a minimum of 100 BTC on deposit before a rating gets published.  I added some ideas in the WPW thread.

Proudly offering one of the worst pass-though schemes via Starfish - i.e. use someone else.
Shareholder in the original PPT.x GLBSE based rotating bond program.

And I chose not to fly 20-ish hours to Vegas in economy - my commitments to my day job kept me in NZ.

I did half a week on 16k at 0.5%.

If I wanted to be picky, "being" only has one "e"  (lol)  No problem.

The Micon stamp of approval - I'm envious, I don't have one.

Now I'm going to start feeling sorry for Micon.  I must be very stupid (as he noted above) and he is turning into a parody of what he vainly tried to prevent.

(yes - this is as close as I get to trolling - but this has turned into one of the more entertaining threads in my household.  i should get MNW and Phinneas to look in, or even LouxGaroux for some more serious dissection of the thread.)

Must be a real pain in the arse to realise that real economic activity can deliver 2%/week or more.  On that basis, Micon shouldn't be in the bitcoin world at all.

You have set a record of sorts - least evidence, and fewest posts - I feel like depositing some coins - can I have a deposit address?

While working with RustyRyan today it became obvious that start-ups present an interesting issue: with no deposits or liabilities, they tend not to produce meaningful metrics.  Therefore, having a minimum size makes sense. 

This ties into some of the other size dimensions that are relevant here, and that is the size of the deposit-taking operation.  For example, you might be looking at a deposit, and someone with 100 coins from one person might have a different profile to someone with 100 deposits for the same value.  Similarly, someone with 5000 coins under management might be seen as having a more stable profile, maybe not. 

In any event, collecting data on the size of business (total and # of customers) is relevant for some people, just the same way bad-debts are not relevant for those that do not provide loans (and might artificially increase a rating). 

• Possible size breaks would be 100/500/1000/2500/5000/10000.
• Possible customer number levels could at 10 and double 10/20/40/80/160

This might change the ratings slightly, but the idea is posted for feed back from whichever side you're on.

Watching as I am escrow on this deal.  I presume it is a dual output card.  Have you had this system working with other GPUs?  If it's not going to run - or too hard, you could return the card.

No - I'll be doing them all on the Friday.  It's not particularly difficult to change, as the 70-ish accounts simply get the balance on the chosen day converted to the new rate, but with the 15 or so that I pay weekly, it is fairer to pay the higher rate for all accounts for the extra few days (it works out to be an extra 40 coins).

This is a BTW post.  While deposit rates are going to drop to 1%/wk, to align with the weekly interest payment cycle it will not actually occur until Friday 3rd.

Let me help you here because this is all public.  I have a BS&T account, and have had it since December.  I know who Pirate is, and enough about what he is doing, but I wouldn't disclose that, because trade secrets are just that, secret.  In addition, I know of several methods that I have explained to various forum members over the past year of how to make good returns without resorting to scams.

Within my bitcoin business, I do not have any customer exposed to BS&T, that is purely with my own funds.

If you wish to claim Starfish BCB is some kind of scam, please feel free to express that opinion here.

Information received.  Rusty has provided some extra information that I think he should include in his OP regarding asset backing and BTC income.  Also, at this time, with no deposits or liabilities, the ratios are not useful (it's a chicken and egg situation).

An issue that I've just been advised of is that there is a new claim to be added to the list.  While the loan agreement I'm doing is at the charitable end of the scale, if people haven't sorted out their issues with this yet, the payment process isn't open ended.

And, yes, I have requested a list of valid claimants and address to pay direct.

I agree that ID requirements would be good, as would people providing additional information about their business models and supporting assets (credit ratings).  However, this is voluntary and I can not force anyone to do that.  However, if people make it clear to different deposit takers the level of disclosure they need, then that will improve this section.

In a similar vein, I am often asked for recommendations, but that is a bit more complicated.  Not sure what the general consensus is.

BCB - working on it.