Topic: Are people over-reacting on MNW's bet? - page 2. (Read 6702 times)

Your point is self-refuting.  This anonymous online BBS is *not* "a casino."  This anonymous online BBS is *not* "some underground poker game."

All you humorless haters aren't going to do anything except whine; you're certainly not any kind of virtual casino security bouncer thug or mob enforcer.   

So take your threatening internet tough guy BS and stuff it, cupcake. 

Actually, that's relatively easy to do. Try doing it twice.

FYPFY.  Making an agreement for a wager and backing out isn't a stunt.  If you think so trying doing that in a casino.  Try losing a bet and just grabbing your chips and leaving.  Better yet try doing it in some underground poker game.

I don't think people are overreacting to MNW idiot stunt. I think people are under-reacting to Pirate, and all the PPT scammers.

*ignored*

Twat's that you say?  I cunt hear you.

Um, the people who took on the stupid risks, such as investing into HYIPs, or selling CDS for something as flaky and unpredictable as Matthew's bet, would be the ones "taking the final risk." 0 interest policy and QE means the risk is disbursed among the entire nation's population, either through inflation, or through higher taxes later on. Why should everyone have to pay for the risks they didn't take, just because some numbskulls decided to gamble with their money or sell overly risky CDS products?

Actually people should grow up and learn to avoid scams. The "rape thing" is ridicolous, no one is being "raped" here.

Almost all scammed ppl fall for scams cause they are GREED and expected to hurr durr become rich 7% week hurr durr, matthew will give me 10.000 btc if i make 1 post in the thread hurr durr.

It just showed how immature the bitcoin finance is, in the real world, there will be CDS sold to hedge the risk for MNW's default

And of course at the end someone has to pay big either way, so it ends up with a sovereign default which is solved by 0 interest policy and QE, but in bitcoin's case no one is taking the final risk

There was nothing inadvertent or unintended about it. He knew that his bet was being used by BS&T "investors" in order to hedge their likely losses and not only continued to accept their bets but actually advertised it to them for that specific purpose.

Ever reported minor theft of goods or USD? Yeah, nothing usually happens with that either. People get away with stealing millions in USD all the time, as well. However with USD and other currencies there is lots of normal business going on so people don't dwell on that stuff too much. They just transform into jokes "Pulling a Maddof" or "Too big to fail".

So how about the reaction to all this stuff is to start passing those electronic coins around for more regular activities and tone down the big bets and investing in blackboxes? How about not being repulsed by reasonable fees or interest rates instead of blissfully accepting that miniscule fees and unbelievable interest rates are an expected reward for being in the Bitcoin club? Perhaps ask reasonable questions and think over the responses given? I'm just throwing out some ideas here.

Why is it that on these forums everytime gets scammed, stolen, or anything related tons of people are saying "ha he should not have trusted XXX or YYY, so it is obviously his fault if he lost his monies"

Come on. Thats like saying to a rape victim that she should not dress so sexy / go out alone / etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming

As long as this logic and impunity goes on bitcoin will only be a children playground.

For a 1 million scam "in real life" matthew could have been sent in jail for the 5 next years or so.

And to me sorry but it is obvious that he would have taken as much as possible in the case he would have won the bet.

That about sums it up.

So they say.  I didn't run the (purported) escrow so I cannot know for sure.


Not in escrow is working as designed.  If it is, the money is taken which is quite different from 'giving it.'


This is probably true, but it is certainly possible that Matthew might have thought he knew something.  One interesting thing about the Pirate is that he seemed to have the same power that that old guy in the star wars movie had to influence the thought patterns of the weak minded.

It would also have been a shrewd move on Pirateat40's part to go ahead and pay some escrows for Matthew to get his scam/prank rocking as a diversion.  That's a long-shot hypothesis however and I don't put much stock in it (though things seem to have played out that way and some people did get burnt by the influence it had on the bond discounts...unbelievably to me...)  A contra-argument to this hypothesis is that there would be little reason why Pirateat40 would give a flying fuck about the bond discounts, attention, or much else associated with his Ponzi.  It was all wrapped up weeks ago from his perspective.

Escrowed bets were lost, correct? So he just gave money away in those cases, since there is nothing that he could have known about Pirate that would make his bet a winner, ever.

ya me too, at first i was like its just a prank, but then you realize that he would of taken all the money form everyone if he won and given a scammer tag to all the people that didn't pay....

He said on the forum and in an interview that he never had any contact with Pirateat40. He wanted everyone to STFU and stop acting like a bunch of trolls, and winning this bet was going to do that.  Ironic isn't it

Согласен, но Мат тоже потратил очень много других людей времени. Мы все ожидали как он выкрутится, думая что будет  что то круто, хитро, или хотя бы забавно, а оказалось какая та дуратская шутка которую только он понял. Это как будто он всех пригласил на грандиозный салют, все поменяли планы что бы приехать и посмотреть, а когда приехали, только увидели как он бутылку с молотовским коктелем бросает в верх. Даже когда эта бутылка в конце упала ему на голову, то и то не очень интересно

I initially held that opinion to some extent, but some here have made some pretty compelling arguments that his initial actions seem to indicate that he started out with some hope of winning the bet.  The strongest of these is that he did some of the bets under escrow and what he lost here seems to be a larger amount of money than one would suspect if he were just trying to pull a prank.

If the escrow assertions are proven, it does seem to me that in Matthew's twisted mind he had some initial plans which shifted as the situation on the ground evolved.

I do wonder if in Matthew's position as the editor of that magazine he ever had any contact with Pirateat40 and thus may have thought he had some info that most people did not?

And ignored.  Anyone making excuses or apologizing for this asshole will be ignored.  You are supporting a scammer.  Period.  I won't have anything to do with you now or in the future.

Of course people are overreacting.

Matthew Wright's prank, and it was a prank, not a fraud or a scam, since it was obviously never intended to make any money or deprive anyone of money, did teach a lesson, although i'm not sure it was the intended message. Things that appear to be good to be true almost always are.

So just as "business" proposals that promise one percent or more per week "guaranteed" (or even .5 percent per week) can easily and very confidently be rejected out of hand as foolhardy at best and outright ponzis in all likelihood, huge bets, proposed by the obvious losing side, can be very confidently dismissed. You will never collect.

The thing that Wright miscalculated was the unintended cruelty of the tack he took. He inadvertently acted like a Nigerian scammer who swoops in after the initial con for the double dip. Some of the same, obviously misguided suckers, who "invested/deposited" with Pirate, looked to this bet as their chance to recoup some or all of their losses (even though anyone who collected 7 percent for a couple of months isn't a net loser). So by teaching his lesson, Matthew extended false hope to some foolish people. It's as if they fell for it all over again.

Fools or not, no one deserves to be the victim of a ponzi scheme.

Wright's troll went too far, certainly, but he didn't commit a fraud, gambling debts are generally unenforceable in courts, and he did send his message. These sanctimonious open letters and calls for his banishment are silly. He's a clever kid who probably needs to re-think his polemical methods.

I apologize for my awkward Englush, I learned mainly by watching hip hoop videos. I work steel compony, Криворіжсталь.

 https://sealswithclubs.eu/seals-team-pro/

+1