A Theory on what pirateat40 is doing

[smoothie]

Pirate is such a joke. His screen name should be PussyAt30.

That name would at least explain how so many guys stopped thinking and rushed at it.

ROFL!!!! That's actually a really funny though. bwahahahaha

[JoelKatz]

Pirate asked the PPT operators for their books so he could pay people directly (I think.)

We have no idea why he asked for that information. I think the most likely scenario was that it was simply a stalling tactic. Since no payments were made even for PPT operators who complied, it's unlikely he ever intended to make payments.

So the PPT obligations could now be removed, and 100BTC to buy a PPT is now 200BTC (instead of the 300BTC.)  Would this be to pirates advantage?

First, it wouldn't remove those obligations. Pirate's belief to the contrary, if he had one, is mistaken. And it wouldn't be to Pirate's advantage except in the unlikely scenario where you repays a PPT operator, the PPT operator fails to repay the depositor, and that depositor goes after Pirate.

If the PPT operator is honest, the funds are only doubled. The tripling is locked on the books of the PPT operator.

Say I deposit 100 BTC with a PPT operator. I get a 100PPT coupon. The PPT operator deposits the 100 with Pirate. He gets a 100Pirate coupon. Pirate now gets the 100 BTC and circulates it. I have a 100PPT coupon I can circulate. Pirate has 100 BTC he can circulate. But the 100Pirate 'coupon' cannot circulate as the PPT operator must hold it so that he can pay to me any funds he gets from Pirate. In order for my 100PPT coupon to exist, the PPT operator must hold a 100Pirate coupon, so that's locked. It works the same way with banks and dollars and it's why loans double money rather than tripling it.

[imsaguy]

Pirate asked the PPT operators for their books so he could pay people directly (I think.)

We have no idea why he asked for that information. I think the most likely scenario was that it was simply a stalling tactic. Since no payments were made even for PPT operators who complied, it's unlikely he ever intended to make payments.

Q: Why did you require PPT operators to submit their account holders information?
A: There’re a few reasons for doing this.  The largest of which was to remove the PPT operators from the added risk of their users claiming
they were not paid once the main account was paid. The other reasons can not be disclosed.

http://pastebin.com/DVNsx7xz

[ArticMine]

... The other reasons can not be disclosed.

These propriety "other reasons" are the really interesting part.

[Piper67]

... The other reasons can not be disclosed.

These propriety "other reasons" are the really interesting part.

And when you think about it, the first reason seems shady as well. There are dozens of ways of making sure who's got paid and who hasn't which do not require the private information of users to be disseminated like that.

[Raize]

confused here.  they no longer needed pirate because they have their own and then you say they don't have their own.  or

If you take a look at nimda and dooglus's post here...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94675.msg1063869#msg1063869

You'll basically see that we know that the 1Dky address was owned by Silk Road. So we know they have coin, but we also know where it is from. It is possible that they needed pirate's LOANED coin to further complicate the process of where money was coming from and going to. Now that he's no longer an agent in their affairs, they are simply spinning off from the 1Dky address back to their vendors. This means the vendors are now responsible for "cleaning" their withdrawn coin.

For a practical application, expect to see at least a handful of high-profile drug busts over the next couple months, maybe. Large withdrawals from addresses linked to 1Dky are going to be pretty clear evidence of having a Silk Road vendor account.