Coincomm (OP)
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
 |
August 31, 2012, 05:46:02 AM |
|
imsaguy, please explain.
This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Fuck it this is all silliness and FUD... I highly suspect pirate is just fucking around and playing games... Ditto. You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Atlas? Are you threatened? I am not your fucktarded buddy. Take a look at your bet thread and take a guess. |
|
|
|
|
|
repentance
|
|
August 31, 2012, 05:56:24 AM |
|
imsaguy, please explain.
This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. To some extent, I think the question revolves around who would have standing to sue pirate - the investors or the PPT operators. Pirate's not obliged to pay anyone who has no legal standing to collect the debts owed or accept settlements on their behalf and it's not clear that the agreements made between the investors and the pass-throughs give their operators that authority. It's definitely not clear that the PPT operators would have a claim that is provable in bankruptcy if pirate goes through a legal insolvency process (which seems unlikely if his business model involved illegal activity as so many suspect). I definitely want to hear what transpires at the next supersekrit IRC meeting, especially as GPUMax payments have reportedly been flaky lately. Just out of interest. Are any of the PPT operators going to agree to a settlement on undisclosed terms if that's what pirate demands? |
All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
|
|
|
|
repentance
|
|
August 31, 2012, 07:02:48 AM |
|
No fucking way would i do that.
Pleased to hear it. |
All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
|
|
|
PinkyPie
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 21
Merit: 0
|
|
August 31, 2012, 09:50:28 AM |
|
I thought matthew had already lost his bet...
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
but then:
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
And pirate's thread:
Quote from: Pirateat40
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.
By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED.
|
|
|
|
|
|
repentance
|
|
August 31, 2012, 10:16:06 AM |
|
I thought matthew had already lost his bet...
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
but then:
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
And pirate's thread:
Quote from: Pirateat40
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.
By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED.
Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. |
All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
|
|
|
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1128
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:33:43 PM |
|
I thought matthew had already lost his bet...
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
but then:
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
And pirate's thread:
Quote from: Pirateat40
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.
By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED.
Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. I concur, it does look like he lost and there's really no way to win but might as well stick to the deadline. |
|
|
|
|
evolve
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:35:14 PM |
|
I thought matthew had already lost his bet...
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
but then:
Quote from: Matthew N. Wright
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.
And pirate's thread:
Quote from: Pirateat40
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.
By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED.
Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. When I made my bet, I put the specific caveat in my bet that I win if pirate doesn't pay out 100% (regardless of any agreement by pirate). He agreed to those terms when he accepted the bet, so he is not weasling out that easy. |
|
|
|
|
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:39:57 PM |
|
You'd have to be either naive or just out to make a point to get in a bet with a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life.
|
I'm grumpy!!
|
|
|
bitlane
Internet detective
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I heart thebaron
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:42:17 PM |
|
.......a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life.
I take offense to that. METH IS AWESOME....and some of us are just a bit 'behind schedule' in life  |
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:44:11 PM |
|
You'd have to be either naive or just out to make a point to get in a bet with a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life.
[需要的引證] |
|
|
|
muyuu
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:49:37 PM |
|
Of course Pirate would rather not pay Goat, who he thinks is his little bitch, than not paying potentially dangerous fuckers he doesn't know. As for the bet, the good thing is that Bitcoin London 2012 is a good 1 week after it's settled and Matthew will be there  |
GPG ID: 7294199D - OTC ID: muyuu (470F97EB7294199D)
forum tea fund BTC 1Epv7KHbNjYzqYVhTCgXWYhGSkv7BuKGEU DOGE DF1eTJ2vsxjHpmmbKu9jpqsrg5uyQLWksM CAP F1MzvmmHwP2UhFq82NQT7qDU9NQ8oQbtkQ
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
August 31, 2012, 02:53:06 PM |
|
It's spelled "renege", Coincomm. Not "renigg". That's not even a word. Why should I pay attention to what you write if you can't spell?
|
|
|
|
|
finkleshnorts
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:11:02 PM |
|
He probably learned the word by playing spades at summer camp.
|
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:13:20 PM |
|
........ a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball .....
Proof or it never happened. |
|
|
|
|
|
JoelKatz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:35:19 PM |
|
There is no common law on the books that allows you to create liability for other people by using their products or otherwise.
Not true. See my post about intended third party beneficiaries. The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate, so equity requires the pass through account holders be able to hold Pirate liable for his default to the PPT operator. Pirate's obligation is to the operators, but most likely PPT holders can enforce it due to their standing as creditor beneficiaries. |
I am an employee of Ripple. Follow me on Twitter @JoelKatz
1Joe1Katzci1rFcsr9HH7SLuHVnDy2aihZ BM-NBM3FRExVJSJJamV9ccgyWvQfratUHgN
|
|
|
|
|
JoelKatz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:51:06 PM |
|
"The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but...
I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds. |
I am an employee of Ripple. Follow me on Twitter @JoelKatz
1Joe1Katzci1rFcsr9HH7SLuHVnDy2aihZ BM-NBM3FRExVJSJJamV9ccgyWvQfratUHgN
|
|
|
JoelKatz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:55:06 PM |
|
"The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but...
I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds. I bought 1/4th of my bonds. Right, and as PPT operator, you have no incentive to pursue Pirate for those bonds. As the bond holder, you do. |
I am an employee of Ripple. Follow me on Twitter @JoelKatz
1Joe1Katzci1rFcsr9HH7SLuHVnDy2aihZ BM-NBM3FRExVJSJJamV9ccgyWvQfratUHgN
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
August 31, 2012, 03:58:19 PM |
|
"The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but...
I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds. I bought 1/4th of my bonds. Right, and as PPT operator, you have no incentive to pursue Pirate for those bonds. As the bond holder, you do. What happened to the sandwich, Joel? Does not the deli owner have incentive to chase you down? |
|
|
|
|
