It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.

I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.

I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.


If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.

This argument is equivalent to whether I should categorize my crackhouses depending on how likely they are to cut dangerous substances into the drugs.

The forum doesn't promote anything. This is a platform for discussion.

That was a fun site which published all of the rules. No one was scammed there. I even called it a Ponzi scheme in my signature...

let's discuss it more *after* pirate pays (if ever).

It's been reported on irc://freenode/btcst by ppl who apparently know this, I'm just relaying the most current informed info available...

Last Active:    Today at 10:51:53 PM

Legitimate businesses can default sometimes, but ponzis always default. Oh, and legitimate businesses provide evidence that they've actually invested money where they claim they're going to and that it genuinely didn't work out in order to distinguish themselves from scammers who are pretending that their business just failed.

Hey Team Ponzi - serious question: what Ponzi operator has voluntarily declared default? Pirate doesn't count because he still hasn't admitted or been proven to run one.

Considering that he will likely tell more on friday and that most here rely on assumptions and won't be open to discussion, I will just say that the general concept is probably exposed here. He was buying and selling coins

Oh you mean that only scams default, legitimate businesses don't?

Interesting.

By the way, yeah it was pretty obvious he was having troubles and would defaut, as it is obvious he is not a scammer. I stand by what everyword I said.

For the entire duration of this debate, I've been of a mind that it's impossible to know one way or the other without concrete evidence. I still hold that stance.

Pirate's operation has been ongoing for barely a year. If Pirate does end up paying out, you won't have any wiggle room to backtrack on what you've said; your reputation here will be shattered beyond repair.

yet so full of falsehoods such as "You have not lost a single bitcoin.". yeah, oat hay 

Congrats.  Go find the post, it hasn't been touched.  Maged even quoted it.

If one of the victims had said that, I might not have replied, but if you say it, a few words are in order.

It does not surprise me that you say it. You have not lost a single bitcoin. Instead you have benefitted handsomely from being a front-end for the criminal Ponzi scheme. Tell us a little bit about how well your business has gone. How much did you make? How much of that are you going to distribute to those who have given you their money?

Of course you now say you didn't have a clue. But you cleverly made sure in your contracts that you would not lose a penny when the pirate shuts up. Very clueless.

I will tell you something about personal responsibility. I actually agree with you when you say that people should blame themselves for giving their money to you. But that is, at best, one side of the coin. There is another side to becoming a victim, the criminal crook that lies and defrauds the honest, but gullible victims. So far I have not heard that the law punishes the grandmother who was robbed of her purse.

I do not "rate personal responsibility way above victimism". I do recommend to be careful about whom people give their money, but if somebody steals it, then the thief is the first and foremost cause of the crime, not the victim, no matter how gullible. But I understand fully why you want the victims to be quiet and disappear.

Ah, and one more thing—where is your post? The one I am quoting above? I picked it out of another quote, but where is your original post? Could it be that somebody has deleted it? Why?

I also have yet to get a response from him after asking about his 'proof' as well. As soon as I brought it up and suggested that evidence would change my stance, there were no more replies.

People like Pirate are basically short-sellers who bet that Bitcoin will collapse (or who delude themselves thinking they can manipulate the market).

It is those who claimed that they could understand what Pirate was doing and that he was legit who should apologise for giving the guy any credibility.

i want 12 for not trolling anymore in the yeah--sayers threads

it´ll be good for ya feeling warm and fuzzy without interruption

for the next three weeks not to be reminded of the corruption

of your souls and the patsyness of your heretofore considered existent mind and brains.

Cheers Zyk

If anyone is considering buying at this guy's 9%, I will offer 9,5%. If he offers lower in the future my offering will follow suit so that my offer is always 0,5% higher than his.

Pirate is broke, desperate and scared now that we are days from exposing him from the fraud that he is?
7%/week is possible... as long as you never cash the profits out and its only gains on paper