Pages:
Author

Topic: coinjedi / betsofbitco.in SCAMMERS: Declares "Push" on obvious win for BFL bet - page 8. (Read 28040 times)

legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
So here's a wacky theory.  Luke is obviously borderline sociopath, but perhaps we should be looking at coinjedi/BoB a little more closely. 

When this bet was made, the BTC price was way lower (I haven't checked exactly how low).  It's feasible that the site cashed out those BTC at the time for whatever reason, and the time has now come to settle with the winners.  Oh dear, the price has quadrupled (or whatever) and it now costs way too much to buy back the required coins.   Call it a draw, problem solved Wink

Just throwing it out there.

That's a pretty serious accusation, and one that's probably pretty much impossible to prove either way.

Honestly, I'm starting to think coinjedi just made a really bad mistake, but with no ill intent. It's a lot of money, and ideally the winners should be paid what they should have won. But it's pretty easy to see who caused this whole situation.

I'd be surprised if coinjedi wasn't angry at Luke and Josh for causing him to undermine the integrity of his site, as well as costing him his comission.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
I think the next big question which I'd like to see addressed is how is it possible that the stunt that Luke Jr. and Josh pulled is not considered an attempt to defraud bettors? It is quite obvious that what they did was premeditated and intended to deceive. And they succeeded in altering the outcome of the bet, costing those who would have won a large amount. The evidence is already out there, and I don't think they deny what they did.

Is it just a matter of someone making an accusation thread? What are the arguments against their actions being consistent with being labeled a 'scammer'?

I for one definitely don't understand why someone like Luke Jr who has personally invested so much in the bitcoin community would risk what he has built over the years. Especially considering he has claimed he was not involved in the bet, meaning he wouldn't not have anything to gain by doing this. Only everything to lose, so that is puzzling to say the least.

I would honestly love to hear a well reasoned argument why the 'claiming to ship, but not actually shipping', and the subsequent financial damage to both the bettors and BoB(despite their failure here, they lost both their commision and reputation) could not be considered an act worthy of a scammer title.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
You owe the winners their winnings, but how you'll be able to come up with the money to pay them is anyones' guess.

So long as both sides get paid out as though they won.  Then it would be a great gesture from the site - to pay both sides (not refund, pay out in full) when BFL clearly didn't deliver.  If the site thinks THEY screwed up by offering a flawed bet then, rather obviously, the site should be the one to absorb any financial loss resulting from it.

For the record, there exists precedent to this. BitBet mispaid a bet last month through clerical error. The true winners were repaid, on the house.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
Last 3 trolls seem to be missing the fact that the bet deadline was at the end of April 1, not the start of it.

Another blatant lie from a blatant liar.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
They could also pay the bettors who actually won. They can do this without trying to extract money from the losers. The money would have to come out of BoB's own money, but that's what happens when you make a mistake that causes a shortfall - unless they're insured or this sort of thing.

They could admit they welshed on the bet, stole the winners' money, and gave the winners' money to the losers.  That's what they actually did.  They stole the money from the winners, and gave it to the losers.

Apparently because Puke Jr. is a scamming BFL whore who rigged the bet.
legendary
Activity: 2478
Merit: 1020
Be A Digital Miner
While you were at BFL, how many employees did you see?   Were there 22?   Or was it closer to 5?   Please let us know so we can figure out if they can even possible ship anyone beyond the first day of orders.
There were at least 14 I can think of off-hand.
thanks.   that is helpful.  just trying to model something out.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
They could also pay the bettors who actually won. They can do this without trying to extract money from the losers. The money would have to come out of BoB's own money, but that's what happens when you make a mistake that causes a shortfall - unless they're insured or this sort of thing.

Yes, that would be the moral thing to do.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
They could also pay the bettors who actually won. They can do this without trying to extract money from the losers. The money would have to come out of BoB's own money, but that's what happens when you make a mistake that causes a shortfall - unless they're insured or this sort of thing.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
coinjedi, would you mind answering this question please:

Is the decision to grade the bet a draw final? Or do you acknowledge the potential to change the decision upon further reflection or if new information related the to bet were to surface?

As of i know they already refunded people that took part in the bet.... (and did not take a wage out of it)

Ah, yes. That's right. They've already refunded the bettors.

So I guess at this point the only thing they can do as a company is admit that they chose the wrong outcome. 
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 500
coinjedi, would you mind answering this question please:

Is the decision to grade the bet a draw final? Or do you acknowledge the potential to change the decision upon further reflection or if new information related the to bet were to surface?

As of i know they already refunded people that took part in the bet.... (and did not take a wage out of it)
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
coinjedi, would you mind answering this question please:

Is the decision to grade the bet a draw final? Or do you acknowledge the potential to change the decision upon further reflection or if new information related the to bet were to surface?
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
What a complete bullshit artist.  You can bet people will be staying away from this scam site in droves.
legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1570
Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending
The bet started on Sept. 23, 2012, hence referring the bet to the only three products available at the time. http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=701

The device must achieve at least 75% of its advertised hashrate.

This bet was up for six months, with many people commenting on its existence. Yet, nary a soul questioned its ambiguousness until after images were released by Luke after the EST midnight deadline.

To be clear, I believe...

1) Luke is not an employee of BFL. This issue is mute in my eyes.

2) BoB does not deserve a scammer tag on this issue alone, but if some other impropriety arises, this episode may weigh heavily on any future issue(s) concerning them.

3) At the moment, BFL doesn't deserve a scammer tag, for to date they have refunded all those that've asked. But, the pressure and vigil eyes must remain on their operation, for a myriad of clues point toward something nefarious is afoot.

4) Monies collected by BFL for pre-orders is currently being used to fund their operation, and that if every single person requested a refund today, not all would receive their money. Furthermore, BFL can declare bankruptcy at any time, thus nobody who has pre-ordered would receive a dime, but everybody in the higher hierarchy of BFL would have lived comfortably during the course of the operation, and probably have funds stashed away, making sure that they'll be able to continue their lifestyle.
legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1570
Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending
Last 3 trolls seem to be missing the fact that the bet deadline was at the end of April 1, not the start of it.

I have to state that you are wrong on this issue, Luke.

http://betsofbitco.in/help

Quote
What is the difference between deadline and event date?

Deadline day is the last day bets are allowed.
Event day is the day statement refers to.
Deadline must be at least one day, at most four weeks before the event day. All dates refer to end of day Eastern Time.

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=701

Quote
Info

Opening date: Sept. 23, 2012
Bet deadline: March 4, 2013 end of day Eastern Time
Event date: April 1, 2013 end of day Eastern Time
Category: Technology
Total agree bets: 213.82
Total disagree bets: 334.53
Total weighted agree bets: 233413.233
Total weighted disagree bets: 605930.295

Quote
Before April 1st 2013, at least one BFL customer with a bitcointalk.org forum account established prior to the bet's opening date shall post detailed and credible photos of the device on the forum, including photos of it operating, and report its hashrate. This customer cannot be a BFL employee.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
While you were at BFL, how many employees did you see?   Were there 22?   Or was it closer to 5?   Please let us know so we can figure out if they can even possible ship anyone beyond the first day of orders.
There were at least 14 I can think of off-hand.
legendary
Activity: 2478
Merit: 1020
Be A Digital Miner
Hey Luke;

I do not care about the bet, wish it would go away and people just learn from it.   I would ask that you answer one question directly though.   While you were at BFL, how many employees did you see?   Were there 22?   Or was it closer to 5?   Please let us know so we can figure out if they can even possible ship anyone beyond the first day of orders.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
Admin at blockbet.net
Last 3 trolls seem to be missing the fact that the bet deadline was at the end of April 1, not the start of it.

Oh cool, a brand new explanation. Yes, the word "before" in "before April 1st" is quite ambiguous and should have been defined better.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Last 3 trolls seem to be missing the fact that the bet deadline was at the end of April 1, not the start of it.
legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1570
Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending
Yes, I can honestly deny that.
While I was vaguely aware there were bets going on, I don't and still have no reason to care about their terms or outcome.
If I were doing it to influence a bet, I would have posted it immediately, instead of as an afterthought 20 minutes after I posted them to my BFL-hosted blog.

So you are suggesting that it is pure coincidence that

1) You "received" your device some hours before the bet deadline (during Easter holidays)

2) You decided to write your post at about the deadline time (depending on time zone)

3) You felt the need to use the words "as of yesterday" and post pictures taken by somebody else

How convenient!

4) And post the images after midnight EST, thus making the bit TRUE. This fact, and this fact alone, should have been the only proof needed to declare the bet appropriately, yet was brushed aside by coinjedi, declaring a draw. Totally motherfuckin' amazing!

From a random contest to illustrate a point: http://www.hpj.com/archives/2009/mar09/mar30/USWheatAssociatesannouncest.cfm

Quote
Entries postmarked before Aug. 1, should be mailed to Steve Mercer, U.S. Wheat Associates, 3103 10th Street North, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22201, 202-263-0999.

Assuming the best photo, bar none, was mailed in and could have easily won this contest, the submitted photo would not qualify. Why! BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED LATE. Every other aspect of the contest may have been met, but this entry would not qualify.

What the fuck is so motherfuckin' unambiguous about this?

Speaking of unambiguous, why not a peep from Josh about this since this issue arose?
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
Admin at blockbet.net
Yes, I can honestly deny that.
While I was vaguely aware there were bets going on, I don't and still have no reason to care about their terms or outcome.
If I were doing it to influence a bet, I would have posted it immediately, instead of as an afterthought 20 minutes after I posted them to my BFL-hosted blog.

So you are suggesting that it is pure coincidence that

1) You "received" your device some hours before the bet deadline (during Easter holidays)

2) You decided to write your post at about the deadline time (depending on time zone)

3) You felt the need to use the words "as of yesterday" and post pictures taken by somebody else

How convenient!
Pages:
Jump to: