I guess the 3-4 fudders who kept vrc at the top of the forums posting 12 hours straight 5 times a page finally all bought after getting their victims to sell to them.
Was actually very impressive how badly they wanted to buy. No sane person posts the way smoothie and crew did without needing/wanting to buy a substantial amount.
Was actually very impressive how badly they wanted to buy. No sane person posts the way smoothie and crew did without needing/wanting to buy a substantial amount.
Why do people assume (and make accusations with no proof) that I wanted to buy a substantial amount of VRC?
FULL DISCLOSURE: I own 0 VRC and will never buy a single one ever.
REASONING: I would not ever want to be a part of the catastrophic effects of a rollback in the future should a massive hack/scam/theft happen related to VRC.
My posting has much to do with pointing out BS and calling things as I see it. If you knew my reputation on this forum you would know what is how I operated from day 1.
Tell me about which part of the rollback is catastrophic.
In the future a merchant could take payment in VRC and a huge hack comes along...rollback...oops VRC gone from your wallet even thought you sold goods.
Please explain to me how this is different from the risk every credit card accepting merchant faces every day.
What risk are you talking about exactly?
Chargeback. More commonly known to those outside the industry as a 'dispute'. Credit cards are weighted in the consumers' favor by a substantial margin, and having a transaction reversed is pretty commonplace.
Selling goods or services for an agreed amount and then having the transaction reversed is pretty much a standard cost of business for any merchant, and occurs far more often than a rollback.
Hell, more counterfeit currency is accepted daily than the total dollar amount of the transactions effected by the rollback.
In other words, why should a merchant be afraid of a loss in a transaction when they already assume far greater risk of loss every day?
You presume all merchants like the fact that they can get a chargeback.
Personally as a merchant myself I dont like chargebacks. I honor what I say I will do and accept only cryptos that have a track record that I trust not to do that.
Your definition of "standard" is not necessarily what people would do as oppose to what they are required to work with.
Just like how we in the US do not have a choice but to use Dollars as the currency for most debts private and public and for payment.
Just because it is a "standard" doesn't make it morally right nor does it mean that it is the way things should be.
Ask any merchant if they like having charge backs. I suspect you will find very few that enjoy getting a chargeback especially if they held up their end of the deal and delivered the goods.
In my scenario it would assume I sent goods to another user for payment in VRC...then a huge VRC scam takes place...then a roll back occurs and I do not have my VRC because of the roll back. Now tell me how that would be a fair/standard situation which is what we are really discussing as opposed to your "every day business" scenario? How?
Could you please try a bit harder.
There are so many holes in NEARLY ALL your arguments and Logic it makes you look incompetent.
