While you were browsing all 68 pages of my history, did you happen to see all the people I've traded with?  I've only purchased hardware, never sold it.  Tell you what.. you pick hardware, anything that I've bought via the forums and I'll post a picture of it. 

Evidently my ponzi fails because all I am is a passthrough and my reduced rate prevents me from paying 3% a week.  or something...

Like Apple hiding their products so people can't copy them?

Lulz, so those pictures of the shitton of gpus I have running are photoshopped.

EIEIO is completely separate of pirate holdings. I only started the passthrough after the announcing of trust accounts.  Mining, if done correctly, is extremely profitable, even now.

I have a bunch of lenders that I pay 3% a week to. Are you calling me a ponzi?

Quoted for goodness sake.

Nope.  If you watch the payments to bitcoin miners from gpumax, those coins are dirtier than a $2 hooker.

Edit: Not dirty as in scam dirty, dirty as in used.

Obviously you don't know how gpumax works.  The coins go to the pool account of whoever does the purchase.  GPUMax hasn't done anywhere near the amount of leased work that would be required to launder the coins that pirate touches, especially when I subtract the purchases of people I know to have purchased.

They weren't commenting as moderators.. that's the point

I'm pretty good at math   I know what exponential is.  I was asking if he meant Pirate's balance sheet was growing exponentially.  I know some of the largest investors and I know they're taking payouts so it'd be pretty hard for Pirate's total to be growing


I'm most certainly not in on it.  I am not a sock puppet.  I've traded with enough people in here and met enough people in here in person to prove that I am most certainly not Pirate.  I wasn't psycho tricked.  In fact, pirate's never really tried to convince me.  I've done a bunch of my own researching, thinking about things, talking to people and I've simply come to a different conclusion than you.  It pisses me off that just because I arrived at a different opinion than you or the other people convinced that it is a ponzi that I must be in on it.  I'm an adult with reasoning skills and I simply came to a different conclusion than you.

I'll do it for 7.75 btc.

When people like Bob cry that I'm being disrespectful or others say I'm a fanboy, I take offense.

I really don't know much more than most people about Pirate.  I respect that people are trying to warn n00bs away from a potential scam.  I disagree with the methods.  If you really want to protect n00bs, you go to the n00b forum, make a well written posting and keep it bumped at the top.  Trolling the BS&T thread with "ponzi because occam said so" really doesn't accomplish much other than piss people off and create a wedge issue that only drives apart the community.

Now to get back OT.  The bundlers have quantity thresholds to maintain if they want to keep their rate.  The thresholds that have been set are a bit high, which probably means many of them won't actually get to keep their rate.  This is the catch-22.  People claim his rates are too high.  If he reduces them, people scream the end is near.  So he pretty much can't win unless we pays out everything right at this very moment.  If we can make the assumption that isn't a ponzi for a moment (just like people assume it is), if the business is still successful, why would you want to wind it down completely just because some people were bitchy?  I think the easing of rates downward is a good thing, regardless if its a ponzi or not because the rates aren't sustainable either way.   There is/will be an endgame.  It does suck for my pocketbook, I would absolutely love to get 7% a week forever.  So if he can consolidate the number of contact points AND reduce his rates ever so much, he's essentially getting *almost* free labor out of his bundlers and I think that's' why he doesn't actually hire someone as a salary position.

As to the fanatical coverage bit.. the defenders are fanatical just as much as the people crying wolf are fanatical.  Its bad on both sides.

Thanks for this.  I'll do my best to be more polite.

The business.  Keeping capital around to do what you need to do.  ML, pimping, whatever it is.

Ok, let's play through a scenario..

Let's make an assumption that for every lender you have for your business, it eats 15 minutes of your time per week.  Sure some will be more because they're needy and ask a bunch of questions all the time, just like others will be less because they just want a 'set and forget'.  So, on average, you spend 15 minutes per lender per week.

My next assumption will be that we confine ourselves to a 9 hour working day, 6 days a week.  That gives us 54 working hours per week.  That gives us time for about 216 lenders.  Anything more than that, you're eating up your personal time.  We already made an assumption the person is working more than the traditional 'work week' and it pretty much factors out a 'day job'.  That leaves no time for other projects, like running CPUmax or your IT consulting business or the like.  It also leaves less than optimal time for a wife/husband and any kids.  Skip the hobbies, because you better believe there will be a honey-do list.  There can't be vacations because if you're not around for a day, people start labeling you a con artist because you didn't respond to your pm within 15 minutes or payments went out at 12:09 instead of 12:00.

Now imagine if you should shuffle some of the day to day to some of your more willing and able lenders.  Think of them like bundlers.  You don't want everyone to do it so you set some quantity limits, because otherwise every Tom, Dick, & Jane would want to be one and you've not reduced your time investment.  You figure out about how many coins you're using in your business, you divide that number by about how many people you'd like to interact with on a daily basis, and you base your numbers off that.  You've suddenly brought your time investment down from 50-60 hours a week to perhaps 10-20.  Certain people will feel uncomfortable with using a 3rd party for their savings, so you continue to offer them a plan with a rate that takes into account the cost for the amount of time they're likely to consume.

You're suddenly working less hours, dealing with more experienced people.   The pm's are now responded to more quickly because there's a team of people that are responding to them.  If people are dissatisfied with their bundler, they can move to a different one.  Hell, they can even use two or three at the same time because bundlerA offers free lunch and bundlerB offers free condoms.

So far we've not really changed anything, other than to whom the end user communicates.  We've not encouraging new deposits, we're simply encouraging consolidation.  We get more time with the wife.  We can spend more time on our other projects.  We can even go to our 10 year high school anniversary now without feeling guilty someone's going to complain.


1) How does any of the above not match with Pirate?
2) How is any of the above not reasonable?

Which one is that?

Have you seen how many times we were on an uptick in price and a wall showed up out of nowhere to kill it and bring us back down?

Its plausible.  Now who is being stubborn and refusing to accept the easiest solution?

Really?  Money Laundering fits perfectly well too.   Those types, once they find a source, want to flow more and more money through it.  How's that for occam's razor?

Are you kidding?  Ask a bank for a loan, they'll ask what its for. You tell them and they'll say no.  Natural resource mining is actually a risky en devour and many banks won't touch it.  So then you're asking 3rd parties for VC and you better believe they'll want more than 3% a year.

I've received 2x5 btc transactions over the past 2 weeks or so.  I've not updated the spreadsheet in about 2 weeks.  I was planning on doing one at the end of the month.  The 10btc when split up ends up making a bunch of change which then gets hit with fees and eats up what very little of a refund there is.