|
The insurance will pay back over 3 (30?) years. Caveat Emptor, indeed.
|
|
|
|
Buying pirate debt on the basis of someone else's actions is ridiculous - you have no way of knowing whether they're just trying to inflate the price for their own benefit.
You're seriously arguing that if you take a loss because you trusted someone, it's your fault for trusting them? Or are you saying it was ridiculous for anyone to trust Matthew? Are you secretly trying to make him look worse? I'm not repentance but I'm going to address this since I like the questions. You're seriously arguing that if you take a loss because you trusted someone, it's your fault for trusting them?
Yes, there is some fault in making a bad decision. Solely blaming the trusted person misses out on a learning opportunity. This doesn't absolve the person who lied or mislead of the direct blame. Fault and blame aren't a limited resource or restricted to some maximum value for the purposes of distributing among participants. Or are you saying it was ridiculous for anyone to trust Matthew?
Some have been saying that before any of this and they continued to say it when the bet was posted. That doesn't make his bet a joke though. Personally, when the bet was at 10K I thought it was possible he was just flush with coins and doing some sort of quirky promotion. Are you secretly trying to make him look worse?
Matthew looks terrible with this bet without secret help from repentance. Most of those who trusted Matthew to honor it and got burned are from the group Matthew appeared to be defending. |
|
|
|
...
Perhaps the sincerity I read is entirely fake. I now emphatically think Matthew should seek some professional psychological help. ... Lol. Always the US' of A way! Want moral support and guidance? Go pay someone for it! I say give the guy a break. People make mistakes, he underestimated people's stupidity, get over it. Maybe the gamble-aholics who are baying for blood should take a look at themselves? If Matt is such a well-known prankster/troll/clown/whatever, what were you thinking engaging in a bet? Of course you were going to lose by not getting your free winnings. I reckon MNW should stay if he wants to, the site feature of "scammer" tags is childish, and besides, if he's not here, who will educate the n00bs about the dangers of Nigerian scams? Some things aren't Do It Yourself projects. Last I checked access to professional psychological help wasn't restricted to the "US' of A". |
|
|
|
[9/10/12 3:53:31 PM] Matthew N. Wright: I had discussed the prank with johnthedong, Vicente, and several others beforehand. It was all a show. I heard the arguments as to why it "must have been a scam", but regardless of how it looks, I was caught up in the entertainment.
[9/10/12 3:54:09 PM] Matthew N. Wright: I'm not sorry for trolling the community (it really needed it and I believe I have helped push through some new changes), I'm just sorry so many people who I thought would laugh at it ended up just getting hurt by it. That wasn't intentional.
[9/10/12 3:56:20 PM] Roger Ver: I think your best course of action at this time would be to stop lying about it being a joke from day one. Then post an apology on the forum telling everyone that you thought you were going to win the bet, and that you are sorry that you never had the money to make good on your half of the bargain.
[9/10/12 3:59:16 PM] Matthew N. Wright: cbeast has suggested the same thing but I am not sure what an apology would do. Although I know I stepped over a line of sorts, there are people trying to use what I say against me legally at this moment (including Vladimir) and I am not sure what an apology to the community would result in
Perhaps the sincerity I read is entirely fake. I now emphatically think Matthew should seek some professional psychological help. I wonder what the people he mentions as being in the know think of this. |
|
|
|
|
Ever reported minor theft of goods or USD? Yeah, nothing usually happens with that either. People get away with stealing millions in USD all the time, as well. However with USD and other currencies there is lots of normal business going on so people don't dwell on that stuff too much. They just transform into jokes "Pulling a Maddof" or "Too big to fail".
So how about the reaction to all this stuff is to start passing those electronic coins around for more regular activities and tone down the big bets and investing in blackboxes? How about not being repulsed by reasonable fees or interest rates instead of blissfully accepting that miniscule fees and unbelievable interest rates are an expected reward for being in the Bitcoin club? Perhaps ask reasonable questions and think over the responses given? I'm just throwing out some ideas here.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew,
This reads to me as a sincere post. I wish you well, while continuing to disapprove of the damage that's been done, and with respect suggest that you consider seeking some professional help if your quality of life is adversely affected by the kind of behavior we have seen from you recently.
- Coinoisseur
|
|
|
|
The sad thing is that it wasn't even a good "technicality". It was more like something a 10 year old would come up with shortly before the fight devolved into infinity +1 or infinity to infinity. That about sums it up.  |
|
|
|
|
This is not an actual judgement of the Bitcoin Police, but when I see it on the forums my brain plays a little "Somone call a whaaambulance." sound clip.
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, this combined with the recent "ragequit" from a few weeks back raises many questions about bitcoincharts.com reliability. To me it raises the question about the community that uses a generally great service given to them for free, donates very little, then bitches when the service occasionally goes down. The same goes for mining software. Not just any one community, people in general. Why do you think advertising revenue is so central to huge swaths of publicly accessible websites? |
|
|
|
Really this bitcoin experiment is showing us that we need some sort of system where by we pay 20% to the government for services like policing etc and a small percentage to the banks for handling transactions so we dont get scammed.
No it doesn't. It just shows you need personal responsibility. what about the personal responsibility of the people who didn't read the wording of the bet closely? Just for you mysterious new account. |
|
|
|
Phinnaeus how do you manage to wash with Zope? Are you a digital construct mimicking a crotchety old man? http://www.zope.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Indeed, Badbear, it's a consequence of not paying out directly mentioned in his bet. All the things you've listed are still applicable. I would also add childish and predatory to Matthew attributes.
Alternative was a poor word choice. Wonder if Matthew feels bad for any hedgers no matter how naive, doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
A brony has brought up something important, the alternative listed consequence to not paying out was always a Scammer tag. Which he has received. Should be considered a reasonable outcome for what Matthew termed as "Team Ponzi".
|
|
|
|
|
Pirate was given the Scammer tag around the same time as Matthew.
Given all the suspect activity that goes on it's no wonder it takes time for the cleverer tricksters to get labeled. I shake my head at the whole Bitcoinica thing, perhaps tags will be distributed if one of the lawsuits resolves against them.
|
|
|
|
|
Should consider changing your thread title to indicate you received them and it took 1 day.
|
|
|
|
In defense of Mathew:
All but the most retarded here assumed near zero chance the Pirate would legitimately pay up. That includes Mathew. No, Matthew was quite serious the first days, until he upped the stakes and it became an obvious joke. In any case we are not here to joke about money. No one but Matthew knows what his motivations where at what points in time. As for why we are here, we each have our own motivations. I, for instance, am perfectly happy to joke about damn near anything and money is a particularly rich hunting ground when it comes to seeking entertainment value. ~18 mins in If there was humor in that interview I missed it completely. I want my 1BTC Matthew.  |
|
|
|
Now that we've given a scammer tag to a man after just a few hours of his even being able to verify that he indeed lost a crazy bet (a man who was probably sleeping at the time by the way), perhaps we should move on to something more significant.
Where's the revolution going next? Mesh networks? Insinuating itself (brilliantly) amongst the big established credit card companies in the fashion of BitInstant? Bitcoin banks with multisig?
As much as some might hate to admit it, it's gonna be someone like Matthew and decidedly not someone like Pirate that pushes Bitcoin forward...if you can't see the difference between a real scammer who profited off of others and what Matthew did, or think they are somehow equivalent, I suggest you think carefully. Most grown ups can see the difference...and no one really believes something that is too good to be true, much less act or rely upon it...
Good day all.
Bold added for emphasis, you should at least do a modicum of research before making a post like this IMO. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101751.msg1173889#msg1173889He was awake and provided the rope with which the scamming noose was formed. He accepted my 1BTC bet that did not conform to his stated interpretations. He has made no indications he will pay this 1BTC. 1 btc
1N6GNq3JpFoFTWDMjkn1bXWEbTHiFuPZkf
On condition that a more than a 10% haircut is considered a default, regardless of creditor acquiesence.
Agreed. |
|
|
|
1 btc
1N6GNq3JpFoFTWDMjkn1bXWEbTHiFuPZkf
On condition that a more than a 10% haircut is considered a default, regardless of creditor acquiesence.
Agreed. According to your recent revelation, Matthew, I didn't format my bet properly. Why was it accepted? |
|
|
|
|
Escrow adds cost even to honest transactions. That cost can be justified if the escrow service has decent scam protection in the form of reliable arbitration. It's interesting that there does not seem to be much in the way of this kind of service available for online transactions, that I'm aware of. Probably ripe for some grad student papers.
|
|
|
|
|
Paying ransom is a sensitive issue. The British insurers involved in paying Somali Pirate ransoms have been quite concerned they could face trouble if media made a big stink out of it, so far they've dodged that bullet. Partly by not making public statements. I'm not a believer in the any publicity is good publicity doctrine and on a personal basis this is negative mark for Bitinstant.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
