Bitcoin Forum
December 18, 2017, 01:53:09 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 [94] 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [BitcoinMax.com] Closed  (Read 188940 times)
payb.tc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 09:11:37 PM
 #1861

It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.

In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.

This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.

actually, i have already stated that. sorry this thread is so disorganised. don't really have much time to write an essay in the OP.

i originally wrote the order of the payouts:

- those that requested withdrawals before BST closed.
- principal balance up until bst closed, in order of user id (account age)
- interest accrued after bst closed, in order of user id (account age)

all that pretty much assumed full payout.

if there's a partial payout, and funds are distributed via a %, then it doesn't matter if interest+principal is paid in one tx or two, it'll still add up to the same amount.

1513605189
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513605189

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513605189
Reply with quote  #2

1513605189
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513605189
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513605189

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513605189
Reply with quote  #2

1513605189
Report to moderator
1513605189
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513605189

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513605189
Reply with quote  #2

1513605189
Report to moderator
1513605189
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513605189

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513605189
Reply with quote  #2

1513605189
Report to moderator
wrend
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 09:30:17 PM
 #1862

.....just send him all the details, so he dosen't have another excuse to say that all did not comply.

^ The statement above is in contradiction to one of (pirateat40's) Trendon's ORIGINAL RULES WHEN MANY OF OUR ACCOUNTS WERE SETUP.

Loosely quoted (as PIRATE has since deleted all traces of it....)
Quote
...if you borrow or invest other user's money into my program, I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, OR YOU WILL LOSE YOUR ACCOUNT...I ONLY DEAL WITH DIRECT ACCOUNT HOLDERS !


Withholding such information at this point CLEARLY suits the rules and regulations Trendon initially set our accounts up with and the forum administration could very well reach back into page revisions and pull THAT statement out of this were to ever become a legal issue, or his so-called 'grounds' for REFUSING TO RE-PAY LENDERS.

bitlane you are magic, so this is potentially a "fully legal" ponsi, where lender him/herself would break a contract by supplying information about their account/s, and their account would be invalid.  Or am I the only other one that finds this point interesting? Very good!

bitlate do you have original post/link?
memvola
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 09:34:49 PM
 #1863

The idea is that a guy named Pirate who is (maybe) Trenton Shavers and who (probably) lives in Texas would be sued in a real court by a bunch of internet personas for his failure to make good on a secret business plan paying 7% per week, compounded, in a newfangled currency? The idea that this will ever see the light of day in a real courtroom is laughable.

Suppose I'm a big depositor to bitcoinmax, and suppose I'll go to any authority about this matter (because I'm ignorant and optimistic, does it matter?). It would be easier to say I deposited money with BTCS&T if I know that pirate has my name. Even better if pirate acknowledged it.

Having said that, pirate should pay to payb.tc, if he's ever gonna pay. There's no question about it.

It will bring this whole sorry episode to a conclusion that much faster.

Not sure about that one.
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 09:46:07 PM
 #1864

The idea is that a guy named Pirate who is (maybe) Trenton Shavers and who (probably) lives in Texas would be sued in a real court by a bunch of internet personas for his failure to make good on a secret business plan paying 7% per week, compounded, in a newfangled currency? The idea that this will ever see the light of day in a real courtroom is laughable.

Suppose I'm a big depositor to bitcoinmax, and suppose I'll go to any authority about this matter (because I'm ignorant and optimistic, does it matter?). It would be easier to say I deposited money with BTCS&T if I know that pirate has my name. Even better if pirate acknowledged it.

I understood what you were getting at. And it, like many others here, is a good point. It's really frustrating not knowing what exactly his intentions are and if he is being honest and trying to do things legally. And if we assume he is then we could really use some legal council in this arena.  I've been watching TX for banckruptcy notices and as of this morning have not seen one yet.

Still, my gut tells me, just like it did to keep my coins out of it, that he is making it up as he goes along. :/

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
ErebusBat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560

I am the one who knocks


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 09:46:44 PM
 #1865

It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.

In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.

This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.

actually, i have already stated that. sorry this thread is so disorganised. don't really have much time to write an essay in the OP.

i originally wrote the order of the payouts:

- those that requested withdrawals before BST closed.
- principal balance up until bst closed, in order of user id (account age)
- interest accrued after bst closed, in order of user id (account age)

all that pretty much assumed full payout.

if there's a partial payout, and funds are distributed via a %, then it doesn't matter if interest+principal is paid in one tx or two, it'll still add up to the same amount.


To clarify: If there is a partial payout (which is looking more and more likely) are you saying that all previous withdrawal requests will be canceled and account balances paid proportionally?

░▒▓█ Coinroll.it - 1% House Edge Dice Game █▓▒░ • Coinroll Thread • *FREE* 100 BTC Raffle

Signup for CEX.io BitFury exchange and get GHS Instantly!  Don't wait for shipping, mine NOW!
Electricbees
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


We are bees, and we hate you.


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 10:02:03 PM
 #1866

... Tomorrow is friday!  Shocked

Donations are welcome!
1BEES19ds5gEnRBoU1qNFPfjRXe94trMG3
Smoovious
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 496

Scattering my bits around the net since 1980


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 10:10:56 PM
 #1867

To clarify: If there is a partial payout (which is looking more and more likely) are you saying that all previous withdrawal requests will be canceled and account balances paid proportionally?
That would probably be the best method at this point, either way it goes. With the shutdown/default, the rest goes out the window and we're just looking at balance refunds at this point. Just going by outstanding balance across the board, seems like the best move to me. Less hassle overall.

-- Smoov
zyk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 10:24:13 PM
 #1868

.....just send him all the details, so he dosen't have another excuse to say that all did not comply.

^ The statement above is in contradiction to one of (pirateat40's) Trendon's ORIGINAL RULES WHEN MANY OF OUR ACCOUNTS WERE SETUP.

Loosely quoted (as PIRATE has since deleted all traces of it....)
Quote
...if you borrow or invest other user's money into my program, I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, OR YOU WILL LOSE YOUR ACCOUNT...I ONLY DEAL WITH DIRECT ACCOUNT HOLDERS !


Withholding such information at this point CLEARLY suits the rules and regulations Trendon initially set our accounts up with and the forum administration could very well reach back into page revisions and pull THAT statement out of this were to ever become a legal issue, or his so-called 'grounds' for REFUSING TO RE-PAY LENDERS.

bitlane you are magic, so this is potentially a "fully legal" ponsi, where lender him/herself would break a contract by supplying information about their account/s, and their account would be invalid.  Or am I the only other one that finds this point interesting? Very good!

bitlate do you have original post/link?

Oh my,

can´t hold my breath now, as nothing is donated Wink,

of course he knew beforehand that he better  won´t have known in a situation like this, that there are (should i name them? - PPT ´s )

for which lenders(the small fish) he would potentially be responsible and therefore "REFUSING TO RE-PAY LENDERS" is ment for "PPT´s".

and  "DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, OR YOU WILL LOSE YOUR ACCOUNT[/b]...I ONLY DEAL WITH DIRECT ACCOUNT HOLDERS !"

is ment for the investors soon to be treated as "direct account holders" as soon as data is given to him.


Quote
 

Ignore
   
Re: [BitcoinMax.com] Closed
Today at 09:11:37 PM
  #1984
Quote from: BCbitcoin on Today at 07:12:44 PM
It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.

In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.

This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.

actually, i have already stated that. sorry this thread is so disorganised. don't really have much time to write an essay in the OP.

i originally wrote the order of the payouts:

- those that requested withdrawals before BST closed.
- principal balance up until bst closed, in order of user id (account age)
- interest accrued after bst closed, in order of user id (account age)

all that pretty much assumed full payout.

if there's a partial payout, and funds are distributed via a %, then it doesn't matter if interest+principal is paid in one tx or two, it'll still add up to the same amount.
[/quote]



This is nor the attitude neither the mathematics of a CEO of an honest but bankrupt enterprise----if bitcoinmax is ment to survive, the OP is before tomorrow to be changed to at least in:


proper english from zykloogish, but without changing the mathematics , technichalies and features :



As bitcoinmax always stated, your coins are lost !, as Trendon Shavers shaves us all.

In case the defaulted entity BCST is assuming its liabilities to bitcoinmax or pays out
any amount to bitcoinmax, all principal investments are payed back evenly up to the
amount deposited.  The gained interest of all accounts is put in escrow until further notice.

If bitcoinmax liabilities to you are not fully covered by this proceedure and in case
BCST pays zilch, i payb.tc, will pact with bitlane to recover what is being able to recover
from Trendon Shavers.

The interest which i accrued during operation of bitcoinmax up to date is given back to recover
your principal investments.

As far as it stands, pirate has not option neither right to get your data or information
through my hands.

Seeing forward to provide further investment possibilities to you in the future.

Please comment

Yours sincerely..........



Thanks Zyk
 





bitlane
Internet detective
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


I heart thebaron


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 10:48:56 PM
 #1869

Zyk, please STOP POSTING.

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 10:52:52 PM
 #1870

Zyk, please STOP POSTING.

The ignore button really works wonders with zyk. Grin
Too bad it doesn't stop people from quoting him.  Undecided

zyk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:07:50 PM
 #1871

Zyk, please STOP POSTING.



So that everybody stays behind the smokscreen?

There may are too many bad examples like blankfein, dimons, paulson.....who go scott free in the real world after irresponsibly

or even intentionally divert their clients money to line their own pockets.....nevertheless
Energizer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 274



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:09:45 PM
 #1872

ENOUGH zyk! STOP POSTING PLEASE!
zyk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:11:17 PM
 #1873

Zyk, please STOP POSTING.

The ignore button really works wonders with zyk. Grin
Too bad it doesn't stop people from quoting him.  Undecided



AM I SERIOUS THAT THOSE STANDARTS SHOULD NOT BE THE FOUNDATIONS FOR A BITCOINWORLD

IN WHICH TRUST IS THE HIGHEST PRECONDITION OF FLOURISHING GROWTH !!!!
RoloTonyBrownTown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:18:10 PM
 #1874

Zyk, please STOP POSTING.

The ignore button really works wonders with zyk. Grin
Too bad it doesn't stop people from quoting him.  Undecided

Doesn't help with the email alerts either Sad

Sherkel
aka Tombstoner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 131


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:27:02 PM
 #1875

If someone more informed could answer this, it would clear things up for me: has pirate said anything about how much he currently has or will pay? I thought he defaulted, but people seem to be saying that there's a small chance he'll still pay some of what he owes.

What do you get when you cross dominoes and The Matrix?
<A dominatrix!>
RoloTonyBrownTown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:43:23 PM
 #1876

Looks like pirate has added a script to IRC:

<@Pirateat40> Total Accounts Repaid:  22/459 (Subject to require information)

Make of that what you will.

ErebusBat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560

I am the one who knocks


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:48:17 PM
 #1877

Looks like pirate has added a script to IRC:

<@Pirateat40> Total Accounts Repaid:  22/459 (Subject to require information)

Make of that what you will.
Is that #btcst. ?

It always happens after I leave!

░▒▓█ Coinroll.it - 1% House Edge Dice Game █▓▒░ • Coinroll Thread • *FREE* 100 BTC Raffle

Signup for CEX.io BitFury exchange and get GHS Instantly!  Don't wait for shipping, mine NOW!
zyk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:50:27 PM
 #1878

Again as some people don´t like you to know the facts:

If bitcoinmax wouldn´t intend to pay investors back like a ponzi or chainletter,

you could restitute some funds from pirate, as there would be a legal title against him.( as legitimate bancrupt buiseness and even

if he ran a ponzi himself.)

But if its not pirate how runs the ponzi, as he can pretend having known nothing about bitcoinmax tecnica , he will not be held responsible for bitcoinmax account holders.


Donate?

Cheers Zyk
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:55:06 PM
 #1879

I found this a bit more intriguing than the new counter:

Quote
19:33  * Anduck asks pirateat40 what thing is keeping his mouth shut about whats going on
19:35  * pirateat40 whispers to Anduck; people that are scarier than he.
DutchBrat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
August 30, 2012, 11:57:36 PM
 #1880

Looks like pirate has added a script to IRC:

<@Pirateat40> Total Accounts Repaid:  22/459 (Subject to require information)

Make of that what you will.

Question is: how can there be 459 accounts if there are already close at 300 at BitcoinMax ?

Or will his counter go up if/when the PPT owners give them the "sub"-accounts ?
Pages: « 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 [94] 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!