I'm giving 100% ROI away to anyone who thinks pirate is a fraud

[Scott J]

Okay I think I am retarded, I bet 1 BTC..... If pirate@40 doesn't pay out everyone by whatever date.... then I get 200% more BTC?

You get 1 BTC from Matthew in that case.

The title confused me too; I'm used to fraction odds!

Sorry, I'm really not used to this. What should the title be?

I would say something like: "I will match any bet up to 100 BTC that pirate is a fraud"

Though I'm no expert and your original title may well be correct.

[1714098032]

1714098032

[1714098032]

1714098032

[1714098032]

1714098032

[AndrewBUD]

Good stuff Title is good for the people on the lower end of the iq scale

[drakahn]

Okay I think I am retarded, I bet 1 BTC..... If pirate@40 doesn't pay out everyone by whatever date.... then I get 200% more BTC?

You get 1 BTC from Matthew in that case.

The title confused me too; I'm used to fraction odds!

Sorry, I'm really not used to this. What should the title be?

I would say something like: "I will match any bet up to 100 BTC that pirate is a fraud"

Though I'm no expert and your original title may well be correct.

Thats a winner I think

[Scott J]

I'll proxy bets for 10%

9%  

8%

Proxying bets for 5%, free market guys

I'll do it for free / donation, senbonzakura style  

[AndrewBUD]

I would say something like: "I will match any bet up to 100 BTC that pirate is a fraud"

Though I'm no expert and your original title may well be correct.

if pirate turns out to be a fraud.

[makomk]

nanotube has the hashes of all withdrawal addresses and deposited ammounts. It's somewhere on the bet thread.

Hmmmm. That wouldn't be terribly definitive unless the list were to be publicly available so that investors could check that their names had actually been correctly added to the list. Remember that pirateat40 provided the list and could leave whoever he wanted off it. I wonder if nanotube would've been willing to confirm whether people's accounts have been listed correctly if they were to ask.

This is difficult to clarify, but I'll do my best in good faith:

If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% without agreement to investors, -that- is fraud and a failure to pay back. I would obviously lose the bet.
If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% but the investors agreed to it, -that- is the agreement and therefor he has paid it back. I would win the bet.
If he owes 100% and pays back 100%, I would win the bet.
If he owes 100% and does not pay anything anything back, I would lose the bet.

(Emphasis mine.) Basically, if pirateat40 pulls a MyBitcoin on everyone and (say) offers to refund them 50% of their initial investment and none of the interest, and enough of his investors are desperate enough to agree to that because they don't think there's any other way they'll get any of their money back, that wouldn't count as a default because Matthew doesn't consider investors accepting a partial payment under duress to be one. Bear this in mind if you're thinking of betting.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I've just been informed that there was over 500,000BTC loaned to Pirate, and that he has held or does hold (not sure which) $5,000,000USD at current market rate.

(Emphasis mine.) Basically, if pirateat40 pulls a MyBitcoin on everyone and (say) offers to refund them 50% of their initial investment and none of the interest, and enough of his investors are desperate enough to agree to that because they don't think there's any other way they'll get any of their money back, that wouldn't count as a default because Matthew doesn't consider investors accepting a partial payment under duress to be one. Bear this in mind if you're thinking of betting.

The bet is that he is not a fraud. Being late on a payment doesn't make him a fraud. Paying back 50% would. My clarification is that investors might tell him "Hey, we don't want to want, give us 90% now". That obviously doesn't count as a default because it is a private agreement and I cannot possibly know what they agree on anyway. All I know is that if the investors report back that he broke their contracts, I lose. If he says "I'm only gonna pay you 90%", and they agree under duress, that's scamming. If they negotiate however and agree (emotionlessly) that that's what they want given some circumstances I couldn't possibly know right now, why would that count as defaulting? It's really none of my business.

[muyuu]

I will ask again as I can't find any deadlines for refunds anywhere. Apparently "one week" since a date I don't know.

If there's a clear deadline and it's less than a week from now I'm betting.

Is there any deadline? or can it be delayed indefinitely as long as Pirate doesn't admit to not going to pay up everybody?

[Scott J]

I will ask again as I can't find any deadlines for refunds anywhere. Apparently "one week" since a date I don't know.

If there's a clear deadline and it's less than a week from now I'm betting.

Is there any deadline? or can it be delayed indefinitely as long as Pirate doesn't admit to not going to pay up everybody?

The easiest way to run this is to use nanotube's judgement in the well publicised bet.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I will ask again as I can't find any deadlines for refunds anywhere. Apparently "one week" since a date I don't know.

If there's a clear deadline and it's less than a week from now I'm betting.

Is there any deadline? or can it be delayed indefinitely as long as Pirate doesn't admit to not going to pay up everybody?

The easiest way to run this is to use nanotube's judgement in the well publicised bet.

I lean towards this as well, although I would be wary of using other people's terms for agreements since it might not have covered enough bases on either side.

[muyuu]

I will ask again as I can't find any deadlines for refunds anywhere. Apparently "one week" since a date I don't know.

If there's a clear deadline and it's less than a week from now I'm betting.

Is there any deadline? or can it be delayed indefinitely as long as Pirate doesn't admit to not going to pay up everybody?

The easiest way to run this is to use nanotube's judgement in the well publicised bet.

I lean towards this as well, although I would be wary of using other people's terms for agreements since it might not have covered enough bases on either side.

Then you have to decide if you agree to these terms or not. As a party, you cannot get to choose on uncovered terms.

The post is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91661.msg1013589#msg1013589

I'm not willing to wait until October 1st 2013. I'd hope solvency could be decided much sooner. After all Pirate said this:

When will I get my coins?
Starting Monday I’ll begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred.  I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you’ll receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I'm not willing to wait until October 1st 2013. I'd hope solvency could be decided much sooner. After all Pirate said this:

When will I get my coins?
Starting Monday I’ll begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred.  I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you’ll receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent.

Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread.

In my original OP I was under the impression he was paying out within 2 weeks, so I tacked an extra week on for safety. In good faith, if he is not a scammer, 3 weeks is fair for a payback, so take the OP for a face value on that point. 3 weeks from today will be the deadline, although it may end sooner (hopefully!) obviously depending on how things happen.

[AndrewBUD]

at this rate my 1 BTC will be worth like 80 cents



Good idea anyway....

[Philj]

100 btc
1MBYncGH6q2NCfHQjrEH5WXe4JzafHircx

Still hoping for a clean closing of bst where everyone gets their coins back.

Can I still get you to acknowledge/agree to my bet from back on page two?

[Matthew N. Wright]

100 btc
1MBYncGH6q2NCfHQjrEH5WXe4JzafHircx

Still hoping for a clean closing of bst where everyone gets their coins back.

Can I still get you to acknowledge/agree to my bet from back on page two?

I'm sorry, I thought I already did. I agree! (Note for future betters; I don't have to agree to every bet in thread for it to be legitimate, I just reserve the right to call out a bet that is obviously against the rules when I spot them. No bets have been against the rules so far except the sockpuppet trying to scam for 9,500BTC), and if the proposed 50BTC better would have bet, that too would have been invalid but he did not so..

[muyuu]

Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread.

In my original OP I was under the impression he was paying out within 2 weeks, so I tacked an extra week on for safety. In good faith, if he is not a scammer, 3 weeks is fair for a payback, so take the OP for a face value on that point. 3 weeks from today will be the deadline, although it may end sooner (hopefully!) obviously depending on how things happen.

Three weeks from today and accepting all other terms as quoted by nanotube then?

Just to be clear, you are not doubling anything if you just pay evens. This part of your post contradicts the following.

Do you consider a forced 30% reduction (Bitcoinica style) to be a default, or not?

Once that's clear and with nanotube as escrow (I'd be fine with a proportional fee to what he charged pirateat40 & vandroiy) I'd be willing to max the bet, 100BTC. That means we all pay up now (you and everybody else). I wonder if nanotube will take it?

[Matthew N. Wright]

Three weeks from today and accepting all other terms as quoted by nanotube then?

No. I never said I was going to follow someone else's threads guidelines. We were talking about a -timeline-, which is actually shorter (and thus better for everyone) than my initial OP. I have already stated here that the timeline is 3 weeks (in the OP and then again in the last post).

Just to be clear, you are not doubling anything if you just pay evens. This part of your post contradicts the following.

If the bet is 1BTC, I'm giving 1BTC. That's doubling. What is contradicting about that?

Do you consider a forced 30% reduction (Bitcoinica style) to be a default, or not?

Of course that's a default. Any forced reduction is a default and in bad faith.

Once that's clear and with nanotube as escrow (I'd be fine with a proportional fee to what he charged pirateat40 & vandroiy) I'd be willing to max the bet, 100BTC. That means we all pay up now (you and everybody else). I wonder if nanotube will take it?

No. We're not using nanotube as escrow. I don't even know nanotube. This is a bet I am wagering against anyone who believes wholeheartedly that Pirate is a ponzi/scam and that he will not pay per his terms and timeline. If this is not clear enough for you, I encourage you to bet somewhere else where they are more skilled at placing public wagers. I am doing all of this in good faith.

[smoothie]

All of this gambling about pirate sounds familiar....oh wait pirate was in vegas right? LOL

[muyuu]

Three weeks from today and accepting all other terms as quoted by nanotube then?

No. I never said I was going to follow someone else's threads guidelines. We were talking about a -timeline-, which is actually shorter (and thus better for everyone) than my initial OP. I have already stated here that the timeline is 3 weeks (in the OP and then again in the last post).

What conditions don't you agree from nanotube's post?

Just to be clear, you are not doubling anything if you just pay evens. This part of your post contradicts the following.

If the bet is 1BTC, I'm giving 1BTC. That's doubling. What is contradicting about that?

That is called "matching", or "giving even odds" or just "evens". Doubling is putting down double as much as the counterpart.

Do you consider a forced 30% reduction (Bitcoinica style) to be a default, or not?

Of course that's a default. Any forced reduction is a default and in bad faith.

Cool.

Once that's clear and with nanotube as escrow (I'd be fine with a proportional fee to what he charged pirateat40 & vandroiy) I'd be willing to max the bet, 100BTC. That means we all pay up now (you and everybody else). I wonder if nanotube will take it?

No. We're not using nanotube as escrow. I don't even know nanotube. This is a bet I am wagering against anyone who believes wholeheartedly that Pirate is a ponzi/scam and that he will not pay per his terms and timeline. If this is not clear enough for you, I encourage you to bet somewhere else where they are more skilled at placing public wagers. I am doing all of this in good faith.

That's all fine but I don't trust you, you have a consistent record at not delivering.

I'm willing to bet the full amount with an escrow, you and me both paying beforehand.

I believe wholeheartedly that Pirate is a Ponzi/scam and that you are reckless and fail to deliver on your promises. Both. I also don't think you have the funds to match as many people as there may be willing to bet 100BTC, because there may be hundreds or thousands.

[Matthew N. Wright]

What conditions don't you agree from nanotube's post?

It's not what I don't agree with in principle, it's about tying a wager to other people's wager's, other people's commitments, other people's assets and other people's opinions. What if he changes the OP? What if they decide to cancel the wager? I'd be an idiot to tie everything down to their terms. I need to remain in control or I'm useless to everyone on either side of the bet.

That is called "matching", or "giving even odds" or just "evens". Doubling is putting down double as much as the counterpart.

So doubling would not include the original money, so if I were doubling and someone bet 1BTC they'd get 3BTC back?   (Doesn't seem like doubling, seems like tripling).

Both. I also don't think you have the funds to match as many people as there may be willing to bet 100BTC, because there may be hundreds or thousands.

Read the OP. I stop accepting bets at 10,000BTC.

For anyone curious of what happens if either party doesn't pay out:

Anyone (including myself) who renigs on their bets will be labeled a scammer on the forums. Theymos will retain the IP addresses of everyone who has committed here and as you are marked a scammer for not paying, you will also be reported to the bitcoin police and tracked. For this reason, it is important that you do not bet more than you can afford to lose. Considering the high probability of fraud from newbie sockpuppets, only established 100+ post users will be allowed to participate.