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

[Rassah]

5 BTC
1Rassahgt3XSxKVJ62oSrQJxtH3wk4MKX
Any winnings will likely go towards purchase of Bitcoin Magazines  

Then maybe I should pay you out in magazines anyway LOL

I was considering that, but with the fluctuating BTC price, I can't tell if three weeks from now three Bitcoin Mags will cost 6BTC or 2BTC, so decided to just keep it in BTC.

[Matthew N. Wright]

5 BTC
1Rassahgt3XSxKVJ62oSrQJxtH3wk4MKX
Any winnings will likely go towards purchase of Bitcoin Magazines  

Then maybe I should pay you out in magazines anyway LOL

I was considering that, but with the fluctuating BTC price, I can't tell if three weeks from now three Bitcoin Mags will cost 6BTC or 2BTC, so decided to just keep it in BTC.

Right, although we sell it for USD too, so you can price it that way in your head lol

[Shadow383]

Why not eh?

7.5 BTC
1CapjnUbbDN76nowHD7jPSWmMoLTwwfx9q

When do I have to pay you if I'm wrong?

[Matthew N. Wright]

Why not eh?

7.5 BTC
1CapjnUbbDN76nowHD7jPSWmMoLTwwfx9q

When do I have to pay you if I'm wrong?

When you're wrong, no sooner 

[1l1l11ll1l]

50BTC
13cHNedUkk65iXhbVjDL5VDYzcexav2L1f

Is there an official date for the determination of the outcome?

[RoloTonyBrownTown]

Well, good on you Matthew for doing this, but I must say I'm SHOCKED that none of biggest blow hards have even popped their heads in here (Vlad aside, and I assume he's not willing to put his money where his big mouth is as I haven't seen that quoted).

In fact, considering all the people posting about how this is definitely a big scam, I'm SHOCKED that so little have actually taken this bet.

(hint:  I'm not shocked).

Congrats,  you're all pointless keyboard warriors with no courage to back up your convictions.   Fancy that.

[Matthew N. Wright]

50BTC
13cHNedUkk65iXhbVjDL5VDYzcexav2L1f

Is there an official date for the determination of the outcome?

3 weeks.

[Herodes]

How can it be determined with certainty whether pirate is a fraud or not ?

He's the only one having 100% control of his books.

Let's picture a few scenarios:

1. Pirate is a fraud, and nobody get's paid back. This will be all over the forum, and outcome is certain: "Pirate is a fraud".
2. Pirate is not a fraud, pays everybody back. But some doesn't want to get the bet in this thread slide, so they dig up an old sockpuppet account, or have a friend (or themselves) claim that they did not get paid back from Pirate. As this would be word against word, it would be impossible to decide with 100% certainty whether it's Pirate or the customer lying, and as long as it cannot be determined that Pirate definately is a fraud, the opposite must be true, and thus Matthew wins the bets, or bets are voided ?
3. Pirate is a fraud, but pays some people back, perhaps 50% of depositors will have their money back, thus creating mischief on the forum as half of the depositors claims he's legit while half claims he's not.

Likewise, if somebody bets 100 BTC in this thread that Pirate is a fraud, who's to decide the outcome of the bet ? My guess is that there will be controvery as for the outcome of this bet no matter if Pirate in fact is a fraud or not.

Some people can claim they deposited with Pirate and never got their funds back. Pirate could claim that these are false claims, and that he never received their deposits in the first place. Pirate could claim he had paid out bitcoins to a depositor, but the depositor never received his coins, and then Pirate could claim that the depositor is lying, and giving proof as to a transaction that in reality is a Pirate to Pirate transaction.


Bottom line:
- A lot of people have invested a lot of money with a person they don't know who is, and also they don't know what he does to achive the returns promised.
- Most people are greedy and dumb and want profit for nothing.
- How it should be established whether Pirate is a fraud or not in this betting thread is not determined, and as it is, probably impossible to prove one way or another.

If Pirate claims all depositors are paid back, there could still be some that has various motives that could claim that they did not get paid back (for instance they do not want to lose standing bets). And there would not be any way to determine the legitimacy of those claims.

Some traders move larger sums now and then, and a lot of people could just point to a larger transaction they did a month ago and say: "Look, this is the funds that I sent to Pirate", yet those funds were never sent to him, and nobody could verify this to be true or untrue, except from Pirate himself, but then we would need to trust him, and a lot of people do not. And if he's just an elaborate scam, he could be running it for months building up credibility, and as such everythign he's done up until now wouldn't necessarily mean jack shit. There are plenty of example sin history of operations that seems legit until the day it hits the fan, and when it hits, it hits really hard.

I've not invested a single coin with Pirate, and neither am I going to bet in this thread, and I'm pretty sure there will be arguments and people unjust labeled as scammers because of this very thread.

I think Vladimir has some very good points in his posts, Matthew seldom has any good points, but he sure likes the attention and being against 'the tide'.

[Matthew N. Wright]

My guess is that there will be controvery as for the outcome of this bet no matter if Pirate in fact is a fraud or not.

Willing to make a bet on it? 

Matthew seldom has any good points, but he sure likes the attention and being against 'the tide'.

That's because the tide tastes like piss and Geritol and yells that the music is too loud.

[bg002h]

5 BTC
1GCDzqmX2Cf513E8NeThNHxiYEivU1Chhe
I bet he will not pay.

This bet will be hard to settle. You have to verify that pirate:

1) paid back 100% of the borrowed principle
2) paid 100% of the promised interest
3) and paid 100% of the debt holders according to 1 & 2 above.

Unless all the books are opened...this will be tough to prove. If the books are opened, sounds like someone needs to write code to verify it all...but then there will undoubtedly be some exceptions and informal transactions, etc. it will be messy.

Many people will lie and claim they didn't get paid fairly if they can't be proven wrong...if only to win this bet.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Here's how I see it:

You have to verify that pirate:

1) paid back 100% of the borrowed principle

Pretty easy. His passthrus and direct investors will state whether or not they received it all. If he scammed them, we'll hear about it pretty loudly and pretty violently all over the forums, and they'll be able to provide proof of their investment as well. Not difficult at all to prove this.

2) paid 100% of the promised interest

See above.

3) and paid 100% of the debt holders according to 1 & 2 above.

See above. This thread is not about whether passthru operators are scammers. I do not need to poll each and every passthru operator.

[bg002h]

You have to verify that pirate:

1) paid back 100% of the borrowed principle

Pretty easy. His passthrus and direct investors will state whether or not they received it all. If he scammed them, we'll hear about it pretty loudly and pretty violently all over the forums, and they'll be able to provide proof of their investment as well. Not difficult at all to prove this.

2) paid 100% of the promised interest

See above.

3) and paid 100% of the debt holders according to 1 & 2 above.

See above. This thread is not about whether passthru operators are scammers. I do not need to poll each and every passthru operator.

So perhaps pirates operation was quite a bit smaller than I had thought...I mean, I figured it involved thousands of people. It might be easy to verify a smaller group of sub lenders. We shall see how many Bitcoins were never forwarded to pirate in the first place...

[Micon]

why is MICON not made a bet yet ? he should have his life savings on this one

1)  just found this - just checked thread as the Seals 60 BTC tourney was starting.

2)  max bet 100 BTC plz    17ByDBb93SP3guxJ7Sqcbz7peoaiBSkGdu

3)  why are you firing off $100k Matt?  err... $70k?  or $80k?  i see why we use BTC around here...

[Matthew N. Wright]

why is MICON not made a bet yet ? he should have his life savings on this one

1)  just found this - just checked thread as the Seals 60 BTC tourney was starting.

2)  max bet 100 BTC plz    17ByDBb93SP3guxJ7Sqcbz7peoaiBSkGdu

3)  why are you firing off $100k Matt?  err... $70k?  or $80k?  i see why we use BTC around here...

Good to have you on board!

Bet recognized.

[Philj]

why is MICON not made a bet yet ? he should have his life savings on this one

1)  just found this - just checked thread as the Seals 60 BTC tourney was starting.

2)  max bet 100 BTC plz    17ByDBb93SP3guxJ7Sqcbz7peoaiBSkGdu

3)  why are you firing off $100k Matt?  err... $70k?  or $80k?  i see why we use BTC around here...

Witnessed

Go get you buddy Van, I heard he also like to bet against pirate.

[Herodes]

Here's how I see it:

You have to verify that pirate:

1) paid back 100% of the borrowed principle

Pretty easy. His passthrus and direct investors will state whether or not they received it all. If he scammed them, we'll hear about it pretty loudly and pretty violently all over the forums, and they'll be able to provide proof of their investment as well. Not difficult at all to prove this.

Say user A makes a 500 BTC bet with you. The time comes around, and it seems Pirate is paying back everyone. Then user A has a sockpuppet account or a friend, let's call this user B, that will help him claiming that Pirate did not pay back funds.

User B produces e-mail messages, transaction records etc. to prove that he in fact did invest with Pirate. Although all of this would be fake, he claims it's legit. Pirate responds and says user B never invested with him. How would we know who is talking the truth ?

The answer is that it's impossible to determine with 100% accuracy, and therefore everybody should stay away from these bets. As long as Matthew would be the one determining the outcome as well, that's just wrong, as he would have a stake here. The outcome should be determined by a 100% independent party. And all rules should be stated 100% in advance, otherwise this will just turn into a true mess.

[darkmule]

I've canceled this bet since I don't fit the 100+ posts criteria, so it was never properly made.  If I want to make the bet, I'll make it through someone else who does fit the criteria who will make it on my behalf.

[elux]

90 BTC
1B2ChfKWKDvEzhaxQBE1hVaw8a7c93qTkC
Never trust a pirate.

Edit: Upped my bet from 90 to 100 BTC. See here.

[Matthew N. Wright]

The answer is that it's impossible to determine with 100% accuracy,

Ever heard of GLBSE shares? You think it's hard to prove ownership if someone has been scammed?

[jamesg]

The outcome should be determined by a 100% independent party.

If I understand correctly, nanotube has a hashed spreadsheet of all accounts, including balances, deposit adresses and the like. If anyone has a direct BTCST account and feels they have a claim, nanotube would be able to verify whether the claim is legit.