1. Contact the exchange and attempt to settle this matter amicably or via an arbitrage. If it is successful end of story.
MtGox is trying to contact him by phone right? |
|
|
|
Vladimir, Bruce:
The call is for a democratically elected judge, not for a dictator or self-nominated judge.
Shadow,
Don't try to take things from where there're none to be taken. I'm totally unrelated to Baron. (And to mtgox and to those 9k and to the 45k btw)
No. This called for agreed upon judge, not a democratically elected judge. This is not a democracy, or a dictatorship, or whatever. This is anarchy. Only the parties involved in the case get to choose. |
|
|
|
Doesn't take to be Einstein to know one. But there're lots of statistical resources, by household, by genre, by hobbies and interests...
Nevertheless the "typical" ain't changed since the antiquity; at first we've to split them by kind of scam, taken there're thousands of them; financial, romance, belief, control, power...
This is a financial/reception(?) scam.
A good victim would need to be greedy, preferentially not quite well informed about what he is investing in - but knowing to get revenue. So to say; the dumber and greedier, the better, no offense.
I cannot accept this as a good explanation of human psychology. It's a plausible hypothesis but is it true? |
|
|
|
Thoughts?
You have a tendency to exaggerate. |
|
|
|
Of what?! Just go look for his posts around.
What is a "typical scam victim". |
|
|
|
In the case itself, reanalyzing, Baron matches almost at 100% the profile of a typical scam victim. Greedy but not that smart, knows money but lacks the technical details, difficulty on express himself, nervous... easily get everyone against him - as you can see from the forum. Or the guy is "that good" that manages to almost perfectly match the profile of a scam victim being a scammer himself.
Scammers normally tend to be expert social-engineers, well speaking, good at deception and deceiving...
Maybe you're looking at the wrong scammer on your CSI job.
Citation needed. |
|
|
|
Dear friend,
I am writing you to ask for help. Since the death of my father (former minister for energy affairs in Nigeria)...
etc.
Chaord is a reputable guy, but he's asking for a lot of money. |
|
|
|
"I never will sue anyone and will just shrug off the loss and move one" is a very interesting position. I bet lots of people want to sell you bridges.
Suing or not suing is simply a matter of common sense and cost efficiency. If someone, for example, ripped me off for 1000£ and it cost me 100£ to recover the loss with good chances of win I will sue in a hearbit, after following the correct procedure and giving a plenty chances to other party to put things right. Nothing personal, just biz. Actually, it is my fiduciary duty to my family to do so.
If someone finds it amoral or bad or whatever, not much I can do about it.
We have very different political philosophy and very different conception of what we considered "rights". That's all there is. We don't believe in democracy, social contracts, the use of coercion, etc. Our dealing with people in life are going to be different and our security models are going to be different. |
|
|
|
Because I've studied English law, and I find it to be generally to be very fair and reasonable and making things simpler for everyone. I do not really have infatuation with any other state legal system, certainly not with US, or Russian ones, and I do not know much about others. Ribuck: I respect your point. I personally do not start lawsuits unless I absolutely have no other choice. Though, in my book, government and banks are fair game. I do not recall ever suing anyone but them. I never lost so far.  You are the only one who would consider suing anybody. Ribuck and I don't sue, period. We shrugged off our loss and move on. |
|
|
|
Choice of jurisdiction and service address would be nice too. In UK for example, a company trading without providing customers with all the relevant details about the company, registration, registered address, physical address, VAT number (if any) is unlawful.
Infatuation of bitcoiners with anonymity is understandable, but it is not always a good thing.
Good for you. I will never do business with a company that select a terrestrial jurisdiction for dispute resolution. That's not because I want to stay anonymous, because I am not anonymous. I am both afraid of using coercion, but I am also afraid of coercion being brought down upon me. I am quite prepared to lose money to bad people. I am quite paranoid about the people I deal with in trade. I consider the reputation, the length of time, and so on. Even if he is founded to be trusted, I'll use escrow and other methods. I don't use terrestrial courts, and neither should my trading partners. If you do use one to enforce contracts, I won't do business with you. |
|
|
|
True, but in the meantime some guy allegedly cannot access his own $45K. It has now been 12 days that this investigation has been going on. How long is he expected to wait?
And if he is accused of stealing 9000BTC, why is $45K in USD under lockdown?
If you stolen 9000 BTC, than it might make sense that you might stolen 45 LRUSD. However, there is only one known accuser against Baron. He's not denying your choice. Can he only express outrage if he is a customer? First go the property rights, then the free speech rights...
And, ceasing to do business with mtgox is no simple task - if you have several thousand to withdraw.
This whole matter would be a lot easier for most of us to stomach if mtgox had a simple TOS posted saying he can freeze our accounts when he is so inclined. The problem is this is happening retroactively, without notification. Sure, you can say when we hand our assets over to someone we are under the expectation that they will do what they want with them. Then I guess you could also say that if you lose control of your password you can expect to lose your assets as well. Not the kind of system most of us would want to be a part of.
TOS and a known procedure for dispute resolution would be nice. |
|
|
|
|
I finally sent mtgox an email.
|
|
|
|
I never trade for 45 000 BTC, it's my LRUSD balance.
Also I don't have any troubles by using bitcoin , without knowing who is block chain.
I may have bad grammar and all, but your sentences are more jarring than mine. |
|
|
|
|
I am going to try to contact mtgox since you guys think he know everything.
Get the situation resolved, asap.
|
|
|
|
I think you are wrong here. Virtual goods do have monetary value in eyes of the law. And while I do not agree with casascius on everything on his post I do think that if no quick resolution, legal route is the most reasonable thing to do.
* kiba ducks under the table as the terrestrial court descended on a bitcoiner. |
|
|
|
Is the keyword "was" as opposed to "is"?
There was a time that people deposit paypal dollars no willy-worry until somebody idiotic and evil enough to steal paypal accounts to buy bitcoin. |
|
|
|
If Baron needs to lead us on a wild goose chase and make all this crap about "uh, what's a block chain"... cheers to Jed for doing what he did. If I were Jed, I would stash that money somewhere safe and keep my mouth shut, until someone stepped forward with a credible claim to it. It sounds like that's exactly what he is doing.
I don't fully understand what's going on myself. Maybe because Baron's writing are more terrible than mine? Even so, I am still waiting for information from MtGox. |
|
|
|
Yes, there is a BTC limit aswell. "He is making a combined limit of $1000 USD per day for both BTC and USD."but also note: "A couple of people had asked him to withdraw more and he has quickly enabled this."Read more: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1861.0I was not aware of this! |
|
|
|
Come on dont be so naive.
Some people just don't know what you're talking about. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
