Matthew committed fraud, plain and simple. While I'm personally only disappointed that I'm not getting 400 BTC, others used this bet as their main method of hedging against Pirate or made other investment decisions based on this bet because they
trusted Matthew. Matthew has demonstrated that he is unworthy of anyone's trust.
I guess I was right the first time.
I have no confidence in [Matthew]'s sense of morality, and I will never trade with him.
Theymos, you are a hypocrite of the highest order.Is this why you took part in pirate's ponzi scheme? Because you thought it would be fun? Did you "earn" any "interest" from it?
It was fun, and still is! I have several bets and other deals related to the final outcome, which I'm excited to see resolved (hopefully in my favor). Ponzi schemes are a much more fun way of gambling than Satoshi's Dice, that's for sure.
I did win some BTC, which is rightfully mine. Pirateat40 is guilty of lying about the rules of the game, but the players are innocent. If a casino rigs a game, you wouldn't blame those players who made a profit (even if they may have guessed that the game was rigged) -- you blame the casino.
I never promoted BS&T, and I posted several times that I thought it was a Ponzi.
You see, your honor, I am just the landlord of the crackhouse. Yes, I fully knew what went on there, but my property served only as a "platform."
If I was only worried about morality instead of legality, that's exactly what I'd say. Nothing wrong with a crackhouse as long as there's no violence. I don't advocate doing drugs (I personally don't consume alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or illegal drugs), but if people want to buy potentially dangerous drugs, that's their business.
This argument is equivalent to whether I should:
- Ban crackhouses entirely on my property. As a proponent of freedom, I would prefer not to do this.
- Determine which crackhouses may add poisons to drugs and ban them or put signs in front of them. This takes extra work and expertise that I'm not willing to deal with.
- Categorize the crackhouses based on how close to market levels their prices are, which may indicate the safety of the drugs sold there.
Theymos is not fit to be an admin.I have no clue why you think any of this makes Theymos a hypocrite or unfit to be an admin.
I'll just repeat what I have written before:
Apparently nobody bothered to actually read and understand the thrust of what Theymos wrote.
In his response, Theymos admits to taking part in what he strongly suspected was a ponzi scheme where others were being actively misled about the nature of the scheme. Theymos also proudly asserts that he did gain from this "fun" scam at the expense of others who were misled. He seems to think that the profits are "rightfully" his, despite him knowing that the coins were coming from people who believed the lies. By his own admission, he has demonstrated intent to defraud misinformed investors as a knowing participant in a ponzi scheme. This is not profit. These are ill-gotten gains, and he knew it.
"Investors" can only claim innocence if they were truly unaware that it was a ponzi scheme. Theymos can't claim to be innocent; he strongly suspected it was a ponzi scheme (again, by his own admission) and participated, despite this knowledge.
He then goes on give some flimsy excuse for why he not only tolerates but also encourages all manner of questionable and outright fraudulent activity on this board.
He now correctly calls out several scammers, but he can't see how his own actions facilitated what happened. He only took action when he was screwed out of a bet. He also can't (or won't) admit that his gains from pirate are ill-gotten.
Theymos played a huge role in all that has transpired, and most are just fine with it and the associated bad press for bitcoin. I doubt Gavin or Satoshi would have let this happen. In fact, Gavin has wisely dissociated himself from the forums.