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

[bitcoiners]

I will make a statement regarding this matter on behalf of Bitcoin Magazine and it's publisher Bittalk Media Ltd.

However, please do allow me some time to consult all the affected stakeholders. It might take a few days.

Understood and prudent.  

I don't understand and this is not prudent, this was 3 weeks in the making.  I would have had a contingency plan from the get go.

This does not reflect well for them.  The longer it takes the worse it gets.  Period.

And ban Matt from the forums.

[1713535309]

1713535309

[1713535309]

1713535309

[1713535309]

1713535309

[1713535309]

1713535309

[1713535309]

1713535309

[conspirosphere.tk]

And ban Matt from the forums.

He and his descendents for 7 generations

[OneEyed]

At some point, a scammer is going to find himself having scammed someone who isn't afraid of violence and has access to a couple grand in airfare.  It isn't a question of if, it's a question of when.

Come on, this is not going to happen. Look at pirateat40, have you had any report of him being tracked down, or even of any legal documents being filed against a John Doe for theft? Nobody in the US seems to be willing to do anything against scammers.

The next scam will make everyone forget Matthew N. Wright, while himself made people forget about pirateat40.

[jwzguy]

This interview with Matt is hilarious so far.

"I'm not going to try and finagle anything with legalease...I'm not going to try and screw anyone over."

"The community has a way of jumping down people's throat without any sort of evidence." - kind of like he does constantly?

"We want it to be productive, we want to create things...you can discuss businesses but you can't harass people" - harass? You mean what he has done over and over? I've only tried to make one business related venture here, (and barely that, since it was a non-profit grou-buy), and Matthew shit all over it with completely unfounded and irrelevant bullshit until it was dead.

I hope there is a way to remove this cancer from our "community" as soon as possible.

[trentzb]

Is it time to take bets on whether MW would lose a case at judge.me or in RL court? I don't gamble but I am confident he would lose his argument in a RL court and likely at judge.me.

His mistake was accepting and agreeing to renegotiation of his initial offer. His initial offer as I see was simply a request, not a requirement...

To make your bets easier to read, please stick to the following format:

Code:

20BTC
13dSK4663Ts7j2PwHS1eUVjycKLBwx7PJM
Optional comment

When a party declined his request to follow a specific format and submitted an alternate format he should never agreed to that alternate format. By agreeing to the alternate format he vitiated his original offer. Whether "that" address was in his previous offer is moot. "that" address becomes the agreed upon submission.

I believe that any submission where he specifically accepted or agreed, he would be liable for the terms, if this matter went to a court. He would additionally be liable for any arbitrary conditions placed in the "Optional comment" section of the submission.

IMHO

[smoothie]

This interview with Matt is hilarious so far.

"I'm not going to try and finagle anything with legalease...I'm not going to try and screw anyone over."

"The community has a way of jumping down people's throat without any sort of evidence." - kind of like he does constantly?

Yes he is exactly the opposite of what he says he is against and also the exact problem he identifies.

[MrTeal]

I hate to be a "told you so" guy, but people were trying to warn other people that relying on Matthew to pay out as a strategy to hedge their Pirate debt or as a guaranteed moneymaking option was a bad idea. I put the odds of Matthew paying out at 10%, and that was when the bet was still at 10k. Is Matthew a scummy fuck? Yes. Is his interpretation of his OP indefensible? Yes. Should everyone have seen this coming? Once the bet started creeping up to 20k, probably.

[bitcoinBull]

I already paid 20 BTC for each entry as described in the bet thread. I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

[smoothie]

Is it time to take bets on whether MW would lose a case at judge.me or in RL court? I don't gamble but I am confident he would lose his argument in a RL court and likely at judge.me.

His mistake was accepting and agreeing to renegotiation of his initial offer. His initial offer as I see was simply a request, not a requirement...

To make your bets easier to read, please stick to the following format:

Code:

20BTC
13dSK4663Ts7j2PwHS1eUVjycKLBwx7PJM
Optional comment

When a party declined his request to follow a specific format and submitted an alternate format he should never agreed to that alternate format. By agreeing to the alternate format he vitiated his original offer. Whether "that" address was in his previous offer is moot. "that" address becomes the agreed upon submission.

I believe that any submission where he specifically accepted or agreed, he would be liable for the terms, if this matter went to a court. He would additionally be liable for any arbitrary conditions placed in the "Optional comment" section of the submission.

IMHO

Yeah technically

[CoinCidental]

I will make a statement regarding this matter on behalf of Bitcoin Magazine and it's publisher Bittalk Media Ltd.

However, please do allow me some time to consult all the affected stakeholders. It might take a few days.

Understood and prudent.  

I don't understand and this is not prudent, this was 3 weeks in the making.  I would have had a contingency plan from the get go.

This does not reflect well for them.  The longer it takes the worse it gets.  Period.

And ban Matt from the forums.

regardless ,of whether their are other shareholders in the magazine

it helped matthew legitimise this scam by being their "Editor in chief " of bitcoin magazine and also a staff member of bitcointalk so he was in effect a figure people thought they could trust
i wont be buying one ever and if i find out any more businesses hes involved in i will
blacklist those as well

[bitcoinBull]

This interview with Matt is hilarious so far.

"I'm not going to try and finagle anything with legalease...I'm not going to try and screw anyone over."

"The community has a way of jumping down people's throat without any sort of evidence." - kind of like he does constantly?

Yes he is exactly the opposite of what he says he is against and also the exact problem he identifies.

Like I said yesterday, MNW is a hypocrite of the highest order.

[smoothie]

I will make a statement regarding this matter on behalf of Bitcoin Magazine and it's publisher Bittalk Media Ltd.

However, please do allow me some time to consult all the affected stakeholders. It might take a few days.

Understood and prudent.  

I don't understand and this is not prudent, this was 3 weeks in the making.  I would have had a contingency plan from the get go.

This does not reflect well for them.  The longer it takes the worse it gets.  Period.

And ban Matt from the forums.

regardless ,of whether their are other shareholders in the magazine

it helped matthew legitimise this scam by being their "Editor in chief " of bitcoin magazine and also a staff member of bitcointalk so he was in effect a figure people thought they could trust
i wont be buying one ever and if i find out any more businesses hes involved in i will
blacklist those as well

Keep an eye out on the Ellet. He is involved with that.

Me too. As long as he is a part of BTC mag I will never buy a copy nor refer another to buy.

[Grix]

Please don't let this affect Bitcoin Magazine. The magazine itself is an excellent contribution to the community and huge advertising for bitcoin. Don't let one person's mistakes ruin the whole thing. I'm sure Vladimir will exclude Matthew from any further involvement.

[jwzguy]

Please don't let this affect Bitcoin Magazine. The magazine itself is an excellent contribution to the community and huge advertising for bitcoin. Don't let one person's mistakes ruin the whole thing. I'm sure Vladimir will exclude Matthew from any further involvement.

Matthew's destructive and childish behavior has affected Bitcoin Magazine since day 1. This latest bunch of horseshit is just getting more attention than usual.

[dust]

I made my bet back when pirate debt was trading at ~75% of its face value, and got 2.5:1 odds, so I was making an even and fair bet at the time.  I did not pile on thousands of more btc when it was obvious I would "win", because it sounded too good to be true.

I purchased insurance from CPA in the case that matthew did not pay out.  I also promised to buy a bitcoin magazine if I won, a term I will still honor if I receive my coins through the insurance.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Please don't let this affect Bitcoin Magazine. The magazine itself is an excellent contribution to the community and huge advertising for bitcoin. Don't let one person's mistakes ruin the whole thing. I'm sure Vladimir will exclude Matthew from any further involvement.

Merely excluding him from further involvement is insufficient IMHO. If Matt has any equity stake he should be bought out.  However that may simply not be possible depending on the legal structure of the entity.

[greyhawk]

EDIT: retracted

[coinft]

When a party declined his request to follow a specific format and submitted an alternate format he should never agreed to that alternate format. By agreeing to the alternate format he vitiated his original offer. Whether "that" address was in his previous offer is moot. "that" address becomes the agreed upon submission.

Exactly my line of thinking.

I believe that any submission where he specifically accepted or agreed, he would be liable for the terms, if this matter went to a court. He would additionally be liable for any arbitrary conditions placed in the "Optional comment" section of the submission.

The only problem is, courts could decline to judge a gentlemen's bet. However those who tried to hedge against pirate's default, and which Matt knew by his own admission, might claim damages by willfully leading them on. Who knows, maybe Matt tried to corner the debt market himself, which would lead this into outright fraud territority and liability.

IANAL

[556j]

What about that loud-mouthed jerk who kept egging on people for days to partake in this wonderful gamble, RobyTobysomethingsomething?

Shouldn't he be scammertagged too? He obviously knew how this is going to end.

That guy lost at least 100 bitcoins for real (escrowed through theymos) that's funny enough. Also shows he didn't know what would happen. Just dumb.

Matthew shouldn't be banned. We all know he'd just make new accounts. The scammer tag looks good on him. No reason to not let him show it off to the 14 people that don't have him on ignore.

[greyhawk]

What about that loud-mouthed jerk who kept egging on people for days to partake in this wonderful gamble, RobyTobysomethingsomething?

Shouldn't he be scammertagged too? He obviously knew how this is going to end.

That guy lost at least 100 bitcoins for real (escrowed through theymos) that's funny enough. Also shows he didn't know what would happen. Just dumb.

Yeah, I just found that thread myself. So I'll retract the accusation.