[BitcoinMax.com] Closed - page 25. | Bitcointalksearch.org

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: memvola on August 30, 2012, 04:34:49 PM

Quote from: IveBeenBit on August 30, 2012, 04:08:50 PM

The idea is that a guy named Pirate who is (maybe) Trenton Shavers and who (probably) lives in Texas would be sued in a real court by a bunch of internet personas for his failure to make good on a secret business plan paying 7% per week, compounded, in a newfangled currency? The idea that this will ever see the light of day in a real courtroom is laughable.

Suppose I'm a big depositor to bitcoinmax, and suppose I'll go to any authority about this matter (because I'm ignorant and optimistic, does it matter?). It would be easier to say I deposited money with BTCS&T if I know that pirate has my name. Even better if pirate acknowledged it.

I understood what you were getting at. And it, like many others here, is a good point. It's really frustrating not knowing what exactly his intentions are and if he is being honest and trying to do things legally. And if we assume he is then we could really use some legal council in this arena. I've been watching TX for banckruptcy notices and as of this morning have not seen one yet.

Still, my gut tells me, just like it did to keep my coins out of it, that he is making it up as he goes along. :/

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: IveBeenBit on August 30, 2012, 04:08:50 PM

The idea is that a guy named Pirate who is (maybe) Trenton Shavers and who (probably) lives in Texas would be sued in a real court by a bunch of internet personas for his failure to make good on a secret business plan paying 7% per week, compounded, in a newfangled currency? The idea that this will ever see the light of day in a real courtroom is laughable.

Suppose I'm a big depositor to bitcoinmax, and suppose I'll go to any authority about this matter (because I'm ignorant and optimistic, does it matter?). It would be easier to say I deposited money with BTCS&T if I know that pirate has my name. Even better if pirate acknowledged it.

Having said that, pirate should pay to payb.tc, if he's ever gonna pay. There's no question about it.

Quote from: IveBeenBit on August 30, 2012, 04:08:50 PM

It will bring this whole sorry episode to a conclusion that much faster.

Not sure about that one.

wrend

member

Activity: 76

Merit: 10

Quote from: bitlane on August 30, 2012, 08:53:09 AM

Quote from: Coin.Karma on August 30, 2012, 06:19:01 AM

.....just send him all the details, so he dosen't have another excuse to say that all did not comply.

^ The statement above is in contradiction to one of (pirateat40's) Trendon's ORIGINAL RULES WHEN MANY OF OUR ACCOUNTS WERE SETUP.

Loosely quoted (as PIRATE has since deleted all traces of it....)

Quote

...if you borrow or invest other user's money into my program, I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, OR YOU WILL LOSE YOUR ACCOUNT...I ONLY DEAL WITH DIRECT ACCOUNT HOLDERS !

Withholding such information at this point CLEARLY suits the rules and regulations Trendon initially set our accounts up with and the forum administration could very well reach back into page revisions and pull THAT statement out of this were to ever become a legal issue, or his so-called 'grounds' for REFUSING TO RE-PAY LENDERS.

bitlane you are magic, so this is potentially a "fully legal" ponsi, where lender him/herself would break a contract by supplying information about their account/s, and their account would be invalid. Or am I the only other one that finds this point interesting? Very good!

bitlate do you have original post/link?

payb.tc

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Quote from: BCbitcoin on August 30, 2012, 02:12:44 PM

It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.

In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.

This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.

actually, i have already stated that. sorry this thread is so disorganised. don't really have much time to write an essay in the OP.

i originally wrote the order of the payouts:

- those that requested withdrawals before BST closed.
- principal balance up until bst closed, in order of user id (account age)
- interest accrued after bst closed, in order of user id (account age)

all that pretty much assumed full payout.

if there's a partial payout, and funds are distributed via a %, then it doesn't matter if interest+principal is paid in one tx or two, it'll still add up to the same amount.

IveBeenBit

sr. member

Activity: 449

Merit: 250

Quote from: RoloTonyBrownTown on August 30, 2012, 03:42:14 PM

Quote from: policja71 on August 30, 2012, 02:04:39 PM

I just hope pirate doesnt pull the payb.tc didnt comply with my requests so you all get nothing card

Yep, that's a concern.

If Pirate says that, he was never intending to pay anything in the first place. How much longer are you going to let him lead you around by the nose? If he pays anything, it will be because he wants to make good with his depositors to the extent of his ability. Whether he accomplishes that through paying out to a passthrough or paying directly, he can satisfy that motivation...if that is indeed his motivation...either way.

And the talk about legal precedents and lawsuits is pointless.

The idea is that a guy named Pirate who is (maybe) Trenton Shavers and who (probably) lives in Texas would be sued in a real court by a bunch of internet personas for his failure to make good on a secret business plan paying 7% per week, compounded, in a newfangled currency? The idea that this will ever see the light of day in a real courtroom is laughable.

If Pirate pays anything, it will be out of the goodness of his heart and that's it.

I'm glad Goat and Payb.tc have drawn their line in the sand despite the depositors' wailing and gnashing of teeth. It will bring this whole sorry episode to a conclusion that much faster. Yes I do have a decent amount of money in Bitcoinmax. I put it there with the realization that it could disappear at any time and I would have no practical recourse.

Smoovious

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Scattering my bits around the net since 1980

Quote from: Michail1 on August 30, 2012, 02:29:50 PM

http://gucomics.com/comic/?cdate=20100326

+13

RoloTonyBrownTown

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: policja71 on August 30, 2012, 02:04:39 PM

I just hope pirate doesnt pull the payb.tc didnt comply with my requests so you all get nothing card

Yep, that's a concern.

Michail1

legendary

Activity: 1499

Merit: 1164

http://gucomics.com/comic/?cdate=20100326

zyk

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 101

Am really sorry but as nobody donated , won´t keep my mouth shut, may be

1. if anything changes in bitcoinmax OP, that it is freed from pirates shenanigans

or

2. all bitcoinmax investors have jumped ship, cause payb.tc ´s feet are to small for his shoes to stand in...,

as he apparently doesn´t see any future of bitcoinmax , where he would like to invest his panic - hoarded coins in.

Cheers Zyk

ErebusBat

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 500

I am the one who knocks

Quote from: policja71 on August 30, 2012, 02:04:39 PM

I just hope pirate doesnt pull the payb.tc didnt comply with my requests so you all get nothing card

This is my worry as well, which is why I started this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/attn-bitcoinmax-lenders-who-wish-to-give-information-to-pirate-104690

BCbitcoin

newbie

Activity: 54

Merit: 0

It's concerning that paybtc isn't explicitly stating that any payment will go first to repay principal (total deposits - total withdrawals) first before any "interest" is paid. In this case, the "interest" was just the btc of the new depositors.

In the event that paybtc did a straight percentage based payout across all his accounts just based on the current balance he would be running his own ponzi scheme.

This too could be the motivation in not handing over the details. The only reason to hide the details of a sub account would be if that sub account had withdrawn more than it had deposited and therefore revealed the location where other peoples btc went.

bitcoinBull

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1001

rippleFanatic

Quote from: policja71 on August 30, 2012, 02:04:39 PM

I just hope pirate doesnt pull the payb.tc didnt comply with my requests so you all get nothing card

His excuse doesn't matter. Whatever it is, you'll get nothing.

policja71

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 0

I just hope pirate doesnt pull the payb.tc didnt comply with my requests so you all get nothing card

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

The reality is one of these two:

Pirate is responsible to bitcoinmax and bitcoinmax is responsible to the depositors. (In this case I wouldn't want to be bitcoinmax.)
Pirate is responsible to the depositors. (Yet he doesn't know who he's responsible to.)

I don't in any way to endorse pirate here, or whatever ulterior motive he has for requesting the data. It just seems to me that the rules if this game suggest that giving the data might make more sense than not giving it.

Buffer Overflow

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1016

What happens if next week/month pirate announces that everyone's coins are ready to be sent (full or partial) and all he has to do is press the send confirm button. Oh but wait, he can't press that confirm button yet because he's waiting for the PPT operators to submit their account lists.

The pressure on the PPT operators would be massive. Not a position I would envy to be in.

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: memvola on August 30, 2012, 01:22:10 PM

Quote from: MelMan2002 on August 30, 2012, 01:06:09 PM

Like I said, I'm no lawyer and such a thing may not apply in this case...

Regardless of pirate's real motives, the PPT relation will have to break at some point.

payb.tc says pirate is only responsible for his account and the underlying accounts should be opaque. That is the ideal PPT relation by contracts of payb.tc with both sides.

However, in the ideal relation, the depositors' demands go through the PPT to pirate.

So, will the depositors sue payb.tc, and will payb.tc sue upstream? Is this the promise? If it is not, what is the place of PPT in this process?

I think it's best for everyone if payb.tc ceases involvement.

We put our coin to bitcoinmax ... they will come back thru the same channel ... If the BTC come back from pirate, i'm shure the ppt will do his best to distribute fairly .

And what if the money doesn't come? Will payb.tc will still act on behalf of the depositors? That is what I was talking about.

(EDIT: In yet other words: The depositors put their coin to bitcoinmax. But do they expect them from bitcoinmax? No. The PPT mechanism is already broken, both sides aren't opaque to each other anymore.)

eroxors

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000

Think. Positive. Thoughts.

payb.tc, I sent you a PM about a errant deposit yesterday.

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: MelMan2002 on August 30, 2012, 01:06:09 PM

Like I said, I'm no lawyer and such a thing may not apply in this case...

Regardless of pirate's real motives, the PPT relation will have to break at some point.

payb.tc says pirate is only responsible for his account and the underlying accounts should be opaque. That is the ideal PPT relation by contracts of payb.tc with both sides.

However, in the ideal relation, the depositors' demands go through the PPT to pirate.

So, will the depositors sue payb.tc, and will payb.tc sue upstream? Is this the promise? If it is not, what is the place of PPT in this process?

I think it's best for everyone if payb.tc ceases involvement. (EDIT: Well, this statement is of course invalid if payb.tc will pursue legally on behalf of his depositors, when and if it gets to that point. In other words, he can't say no now and then decide not to get involved in a future point.)

Raoul Duke

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1002

Quote from: MelMan2002 on August 30, 2012, 01:06:09 PM

You may be on to something there. I'm not a lawyer by any means but I do know that if you are evicting someone for failing to pay rent then accepting a partial payment from the renter can delay the eviction process. So maybe he wants an address so that he can pay a miniscule amount and then he can say "Look! They accepted a partial payment!".

Like I said, I'm no lawyer and such a thing may not apply in this case...

You can't refuse a payment made to a bitcoin address that is known to someone.
Just because he sent a payment doesn't mean you accepted it as a settlement for any amount owed.

MelMan2002

sr. member

Activity: 461

Merit: 251

Quote from: sadpandatech on August 30, 2012, 10:24:23 AM

Quote from: ErebusBat on August 30, 2012, 09:24:20 AM

Quote from: Raoul Duke on August 30, 2012, 09:09:00 AM

Quote from: ErebusBat on August 30, 2012, 09:05:01 AM

Quote from: Raoul Duke on August 30, 2012, 09:01:50 AM

Quote from: ErebusBat on August 30, 2012, 08:56:47 AM

I have started a thread where lenders that wish can give their information to pirate.

What are you getting yourself into?

What do you mean?

I mean: why would pirateat40 accept any information regarding bitcoinmax users coming from someone who isn't payb.tc?

I agree it isn't foolproof. But given that payb.tc has as much stated that he will not forward ANY information to pirate I feel as though I need to do something.

At the very least it would let pirate get an idea of how much/many people are willing to deal with him directly.

Pirate in no way shape or form expressed that he wanted said information to 'deal' with anyone directly. He very well may send a 'one-way' notice of default to each individual name he receives. Some very minuscle percentage of funds to the address provided. And then do absolutly zero dealings thereafter. From a semi-legal standpoint, him sending even .00000001 BTC to each individual address with a notice of default could be enough to prove he had made sufficient effort to renumerate and be off the hook after that.

Of course I have no way of knowing what his true intentions are. No one does except for him.

You may be on to something there. I'm not a lawyer by any means but I do know that if you are evicting someone for failing to pay rent then accepting a partial payment from the renter can delay the eviction process. So maybe he wants an address so that he can pay a miniscule amount and then he can say "Look! They accepted a partial payment!".

Like I said, I'm no lawyer and such a thing may not apply in this case...

Topic: [BitcoinMax.com] Closed - page 25. (Read 190264 times)