enough of these insane pirate bets - MEMS list of fools bets

[VelvetLeaf]

I trust Matthew far more than betsofbitco.in.

Why ? betsofbitco.in has had 0 reports of payout issues and  they run some reasonable sized bets.
They have been operating for a long time, Id say they have definitely demonstrated they can be trusted to handle wagers.

What gives matthew more credibility that betsofbitcoin in your book ?
has he previously run bets without issue, involved in an online casino ? 

betsofbitco.in is anonymous though, so you can't really verify which person really bet. Less drama, etc.

[BadBear]

with matthew probably having a backer it is not like he has "balls of steel".
i do not recall him having 10,000 BTC x 10 USD = 100,000 dollars to toss around on bets.
front man seems to be a better term for it. perhaps a puppet.

either way... tacky.

edited to add: on irc matthew said it was his money/btc. i still doubt it.

On IRC Pirate said he was backing it. I dunno if it's true, just sayin.

[mem]

I trust Matthew far more than betsofbitco.in.

Why ? betsofbitco.in has had 0 reports of payout issues and  they run some reasonable sized bets.
They have been operating for a long time, Id say they have definitely demonstrated they can be trusted to handle wagers.

What gives matthew more credibility that betsofbitcoin in your book ?
has he previously run bets without issue, involved in an online casino ? 

betsofbitco.in is anonymous though, so you can't really verify which person really bet. Less drama, etc.

Agreed - so we have an anon corp that has been doing online gambling with 0 complaints for ~6 months vs a 17yo with no experience or apparently the btc to backup this bet he is running.

There is no logical reason to trust Matthew, if you wish to take a leap of faith then follow me to the nearest cliff

[unclescrooge]

If you invested with pirate then you deserve to get ripped off end of story.

Quoted for posterity

[Inedible]

Mem, what's wrong with Matthew's bet?

Are you saying that he won't pay out?

I'll agree that you could argue he might not pay out any winnings but as you don't have to send your bet in the first place, you also have nothing to lose.

If you're arguing that he's going to take bet deposits and run then you've misunderstood.

If you're arguing that he's going to not pay out then as my personal opinion, I think you're wrong.

What Bitcoiner is offering you is an opportunity to prove that you have conviction of your opinion rather than just making cheap accusations. If you honestly believe that Matthew is dishonest, you should take him up on his 500BC bet, otherwise you're just making unsubstantiated claims.

The demand to put money up prior to questioning anyone is simply an attempt to intimidate people into being quite.

Methinks you've misunderstood the way Matthew's bet works...

[salty]

I trust Matthew far more than betsofbitco.in.

Why ? betsofbitco.in has had 0 reports of payout issues and  they run some reasonable sized bets.
They have been operating for a long time, Id say they have definitely demonstrated they can be trusted to handle wagers.

What gives matthew more credibility that betsofbitcoin in your book ?
has he previously run bets without issue, involved in an online casino ? 

betsofbitco.in is anonymous though, so you can't really verify which person really bet. Less drama, etc.

Quite. It's all about the drama, folks.

[fcmatt]

All this betting nonsense will do is create an atmosphere where someone can appear offended and
want to bet everyone on a situation that has an uncertain enough outcome where they have a chance
of winning.

If they win. PROFIT
If they lose. DONT PAY.

So they get a scammer tag. That is the end result of this situation if one party fails to pay.
In a few weeks they can come back with a different nickname from a different IP address.
Just another way to be shady and since the popular folks here seem to be involved and actively
support it... it is considered alright.

This is not real life where bettors get to see the person and shun them. They are ostracized
and "punished" in some way. Online this is all just fun and games.

So we will have ponzis, fake bets where parties are free to pay or not (unless escrow but even
then who wants to send their money to another "internet stranger"), a market place where some
fail to deliver or deliver shoddy goods/services, and an atmosphere of BS non stop.

This appears to be a problem. But this is not my forum so whoever owns it can determine what to do.

[coinjedi]

Why ? betsofbitco.in has had 0 reports of payout issues and  they run some reasonable sized bets.
They have been operating for a long time, Id say they have definitely demonstrated they can be trusted to handle wagers.

I just wanted to drop in to thank for your trust and to answer questions people might have.

PS: We have just celebrated our first year!

[Matthew N. Wright]

If they win. PROFIT
If they lose. DONT PAY.

Logical fallacy detected. Escrow? Duh?

[coinjedi]

For your information, we have rejected many new bets with description "BCS&T will payback everything." It is rather tricky to externally verify everything, so please submit if you have a better description. Currently only open bet is on public passthrough funds:

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=583

Previous bets on defaulting will be judged based on the amount of complaints in the forums.

[fcmatt]

If they win. PROFIT
If they lose. DONT PAY.

Logical fallacy detected. Escrow? Duh?

Hey. Lets send money to another "internet stranger/website" that was "trusted" just like Pirate was.
That sounds like a great plan. Another vector for a person to scam the community when the escrow
is large enough.

Why are there so many people on this forum that love suggesting sending BTC, a non reversible transaction,
to complete strangers on the internet as a good idea in almost every situation?

Frick me.

[zebedee]

I trust Matthew far more than betsofbitco.in.

+1

Could be just another site looking to get as many BTC as they believe possible, then be "hacked" / database wiped etc.

Way more anonymous / shady than Matthew - if not so then why are they so?

[Matthew N. Wright]

If they win. PROFIT
If they lose. DONT PAY.

Logical fallacy detected. Escrow? Duh?

Hey. Lets send money to another "internet stranger/website" that was "trusted" just like Pirate was.
That sounds like a great plan. Another vector for a person to scam the community when the escrow
is large enough.

Why are there so many people on this forum that love suggesting sending BTC, a non reversible transaction,
to complete strangers on the internet as a good idea in almost every situation?

Frick me.

By god, you're right! Let's never spend our BTC!

[fcmatt]

If they win. PROFIT
If they lose. DONT PAY.

Logical fallacy detected. Escrow? Duh?

Hey. Lets send money to another "internet stranger/website" that was "trusted" just like Pirate was.
That sounds like a great plan. Another vector for a person to scam the community when the escrow
is large enough.

Why are there so many people on this forum that love suggesting sending BTC, a non reversible transaction,
to complete strangers on the internet as a good idea in almost every situation?

Frick me.

By god, you're right! Let's never spend our BTC!

sigh.

Anyone can use their BTC as they see fit.
But one would hope people would use their BTC in mutually beneficial scenarios that are a meeting of minds between
two or more parties that have a positive outcome for all involved.

Not gambling. Not involving third parties who probably want a cut (escrow) to hold the money. Not this current
stupidity you have spammed over the forum non stop for the last few days.

time to just use the ignore button and move on.