So there's an unlimited amount of limited accounts? Makes perfect sense.
This is the endgame. Don't pity the fools, they were warned sufficiently.
In case you haven't noticed, there already is an unlimited amount of "limited accounts". Anyone can buy a PPT bond at GLBSE for basically as little as 1 BTC.
With this change, all the PPT businesses (assuming they'd use the trusted accounts) should be able to give more than the basic 3.9%, so the obvious point here is to limit the number of accounts and make them bigger. Not, as you are suggesting, to expand the number of accounts...
This does
not explain the pointless move of limiting account deposits without limiting accounts. Nor does the whole show with the savings accounts make sense in the first place! Except to distract from the more obscure account rules which help limit withdrawals, but that couldn't be, now could it? It's just an innocent little asterisk or two, surely it doesn't hide more holy inexplicable "rules".
Also, are people
seriously paying a "security deposit" for leaving money with someone else? It's kind of hard to express just how nonsensical that is.
Rules are simple. Game runs as long as the majority keeps playing it. If a limit of withdrawals is exceeded, kill switch, game over. If you want to believe something else, then, well okay, you
want to believe something else. That's cute, but wishes can only change things you actually have control over.
So will you guys finally wake up and at least save us all the embarrassment of Pirateat40 freely picking the shutdown time? Yes, I am spreading FUD, and I am ignoring the
arguably friendly posts telling me to not do so, because FUD is more than appropriate here!
I'm starting to get grumpy against what one could call the Bitcoin Forum mob. I've been trying my best to help turn the rudder on three phases of insanity with near perfect precision in my forecasts, yet all I get is more ignorance. I am not getting anything in return for this, so careful what you wish for, I might just do the favor everyone wants and stop helping people think. Still, it is
absolutely not okay to help flooding or flaming away discussions that may help preventing scams. If anyone would care to read some history about Ponzi Schemes, he would know how users' voices are integral to keep them running.
But it's just like the bubble, just like the shorting mania, just like the leverage mania, why read anything if one can post more drivel instead?
This is getting so ridiculous that after it ends, apologies from the mistaken side are in order, either for the "defamation" I am currently doing, or for advertising a scam in one way or the other. I will gladly give a detailed and well-visible apology should I turn out wrong. The point is that I will not be, and the board will get a nice and voluminous blacklist of people who mindlessly or deliberately made all of this happen. It's not as if an observer can tell the difference between being or choosing to be mindless.
TL;DR: you did it, I snapped. After you're done noticing your coins are gone, y'all got some explaining to do. Yarr, that's right mateys.
