|
Bitcoin Oz
|
 |
July 04, 2012, 02:07:06 PM |
|
Changed the thread name because it's so obvious by now, there is really no need to use kinky wording.
GLBSE should read "Global Bitcoin Scammer Exchange" really.
Leave GLBSE out of your accusations. It doesnt hold anyones bitcoins here. Next you will accuse pirate of being Nefario. *puts on tinfoil hat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The forum strives to allow free discussion of any ideas. All policies are built around this principle. This doesn't mean you can post garbage, though: posts should actually contain ideas, and these ideas should be argued reasonably.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vandroiy (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1002
|
|
July 04, 2012, 03:20:57 PM |
|
Leave GLBSE out of your accusations. It doesnt hold anyones bitcoins here. Next you will accuse pirate of being Nefario.
*puts on tinfoil hat.
Sorry, that was not my intention at all. I just mean there's a lot of scammers on there. I have no indication that GLBSE itself is fraudulent! I edited my post to make that clear. Sorry again, I'm just producing so much text currently that ambiguity can slip my mind. |
|
|
|
|
Raize
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1419
Merit: 1015
|
|
July 04, 2012, 07:51:03 PM |
|
I have a problem with GLBSE as someone who wants to start a silver ETF, but it's mostly due to the machinations of GLBSE than any serious concern about its legitimacy.
I can't issue shares and then get some sort of "backup" in the event that GLBSE goes down. This favors anonymous investors, but I wouldn't want anonymous investors because I'd want them to be able to proved they own shares if GLBSE goes down, or if they want to have the equivalent of their shares shipped to them. I'm more worried about making sure people that would own the silver actually get to OWN the silver instead of having to worry about GLBSE being destroyed then not being able to deliver the silver to the rightful owners post-GLBSE-bust.
In short, I'd like to have a business that can operate entirely legally instead of on questionable grey-area legal grounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vladimir
|
|
July 04, 2012, 08:12:34 PM |
|
I respect Nefario a lot, whatever it worth. GLBSE is indeed a very interesting experiment. You know how they say ohh Bitcoin is an experiment, then move on to "monopoly money", then move on to "BTC is not a property". I really think that GLBSE is a great experiment unlike describer "Bitcoin experiment" excuse to scam EVE-like.
Having said that, there is a simple and indisputable truth. No legitimate business with at least some minimal accounting or legal council and incorporated in any English speaking country will not touch GLBSE or anything similar with a barge pole. This is indeed mostly a scamfest. I suppose this is so far the result of GLBSE "experiment".
"Global Bitcoin Scammer Exchange" is unfortunately pretty close to reality, whether we like it or not.
@honest bob: "pirates angrier investors privately requested him to lock the thread" Please! "investors" paying someone 3k% annually?
yep shares of popcorn are going to rise rather soon.
P.S. Pleasure to stumble upon a thread with like two pages of reasonable posts.
|
-
|
|
|
|
Haplo
|
|
July 06, 2012, 07:19:09 AM |
|
I'm not going to argue here, but I will answer this: What is your opinion on some of the other funds (such as Starfish BCB), which appear legitimate, yet still pay bookoos more than any other IRL fund?
The reason they can offer that much is simple: They charge borrowers 1-1.5% per day/3-4% per week/10-15% per month. They get plenty of business, too. Don't take my word for it though, you can check out Hashking's thread for yourself. When he started out he announced his lending activities publicly, and many of his depositors announced their contributions publicly as well. He used to keep his books public as well, but I no longer see them listed anywhere =\. You might ask him about it. |
I'm So Meta, Even This Acronym
|
|
|
Bjork
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 457
Merit: 250
Look for the bear necessities!!
|
|
July 07, 2012, 03:03:45 AM |
|
Assuming pirateat40 does eventually default, how do you guys think BTC will be affected? Surely it will be fine in the long run, but how much BTC is really invested in this?
|
|
|
|
FreeMoney
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1014
Strength in numbers
|
|
July 07, 2012, 03:14:12 AM |
|
Assuming pirateat40 does eventually default, how do you guys think BTC will be affected? Surely it will be fine in the long run, but how much BTC is really invested in this?
Finding out that coins are missing doesn't hurt Bitcoin unless it happens to reveal some previously unknown fault. This will happen over and over as long as bitcoin is used. What would hurt is if whenever it turned out coins were being double counted Satoshi magiked some more into existence to make everyone whole. Since that can't happen Bitcoin will be fine.e |
Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone. |
|
|
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 5180
Merit: 12884
|
|
July 07, 2012, 03:17:00 AM |
|
Assuming pirateat40 does eventually default, how do you guys think BTC will be affected? Surely it will be fine in the long run, but how much BTC is really invested in this?
My guess is that there will be a small decrease in price due to bad press about Bitcoin in general. |
1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
|
|
|
smoothie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
|
|
July 07, 2012, 08:12:42 AM |
|
Assuming pirateat40 does eventually default, how do you guys think BTC will be affected? Surely it will be fine in the long run, but how much BTC is really invested in this?
My guess is that there will be a small decrease in price due to bad press about Bitcoin in general. Translation: Buying opportunity  |
███████████████████████████████████████
,╓p@@███████@╗╖,
,p████████████████████N,
d█████████████████████████b
d██████████████████████████████æ
,████²█████████████████████████████,
,█████ ╙████████████████████╨ █████y
██████ `████████████████` ██████
║██████ Ñ███████████` ███████
███████ ╩██████Ñ ███████
███████ ▐▄ ²██╩ a▌ ███████
╢██████ ▐▓█▄ ▄█▓▌ ███████
██████ ▐▓▓▓▓▌, ▄█▓▓▓▌ ██████─
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─
²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩
▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀
²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`
²²²
███████████████████████████████████████
| . ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM My PGP fingerprint is A764D833. History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA BITCOIN GRIM REAPER SILVER COINS.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin Oz
|
|
July 07, 2012, 09:06:23 AM |
|
Assuming pirateat40 does eventually default, how do you guys think BTC will be affected? Surely it will be fine in the long run, but how much BTC is really invested in this?
My guess is that there will be a small decrease in price due to bad press about Bitcoin in general. Translation: Buying opportunity Indeed |
|
|
|
|
