Pages:
Author

Topic: Discussion about 10,000BTC Bet (Official) - page 6. (Read 104454 times)

hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
September 10, 2012, 09:24:57 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime. It's stupid, I won't dispute that, and Matt deserves every bit of the backlash he's getting, but it's not criminal.

In real life promissory estoppel is criminal. You cannot promise something you can't provide and then appeal the contract to be void. I know many of us here including me advocate a lesser regulated justice but stuff like this is just naive.

Ahh. That's what I was looking for. Thanks, I'll look into it.

promissory estoppel
Quote
A promisor—one who makes a promise—makes a gratuitous promise that he should reasonably have expected to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee—one to whom a promise has been made. The promisee justifiably relies on the promise. A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance. Injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise.

In other words, He's incurred a debt. Like I said.
Promissory Estoppel is made to apply to contracts that convey a debt to one party from another. I do not believe this portion, "A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance," applies to this particular contract..(thinking about debating that part makes my head hurt) but I do not believe it was intended to apply outside of of some very specific guidlines of a promise which leads to a provable debt. While s335 of the Gambling ACT 2005 makes a bet enforceable under 'contract law', there has to first be established a binding contract. IANAL so can't attest to what jurisdiction may even make such distinction with this particular bet. But my limited knowledge leads me to believe that the particular bet in question would be merely a 'social agreement'. I.E., not enforceable.

Either way, my post is not to be taken as if to be a meaning of my position or lack there of in this matter. I've always enjoyed the finer(read mind numbingly boring) points of law research.
donator
Activity: 1464
Merit: 1047
I outlived my lifetime membership:)
September 10, 2012, 09:24:25 AM
Matt is invited to come on DonkDown radio on Wed. to discuss this matter.

I feel a follow-up interview to his first one is needed at this point.
Can't wait to hear it.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
September 10, 2012, 08:39:49 AM
promissory estoppel
Quote
A promisor—one who makes a promise—makes a gratuitous promise that he should reasonably have expected to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee—one to whom a promise has been made. The promisee justifiably relies on the promise. A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance. Injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise.

In other words, He's incurred a debt. Like I said.

LOL. So you think he's going to pay?

Hmm. I doubt it. But it would be nice. It remains to be seen.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I heart thebaron
September 10, 2012, 08:36:25 AM
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.

I wouldn't consider self-proclaimed 'second chances' as being hypocrisy....
The 'dirt' in the above quote was something that theymos quoted himself in saying previously, then following up on it, with an updated (albeit, strengthening) conclusion.
This isn't the same as catching him in a lie or a hot/juicy breaking-news-flash.

ps. In before the BANHAMMER makes an appearance.....lol
donator
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
September 10, 2012, 08:34:15 AM
promissory estoppel
Quote
A promisor—one who makes a promise—makes a gratuitous promise that he should reasonably have expected to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee—one to whom a promise has been made. The promisee justifiably relies on the promise. A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance. Injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise.

In other words, He's incurred a debt. Like I said.

LOL. So you think he's going to pay?
hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 1009
September 10, 2012, 08:31:17 AM

Theymos, you are a hypocrite of the highest order.

.....

Theymos is not fit to be an admin.

Gene has daddy issues.




IMMA CHARGIN MAH LAZER
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
September 10, 2012, 08:25:35 AM

Theymos, you are a hypocrite of the highest order.

.....

Theymos is not fit to be an admin.

Gene has daddy issues.

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
September 10, 2012, 08:12:49 AM
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.

Wink

Theymos is not fit to be an admin.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I heart thebaron
September 10, 2012, 07:57:35 AM
Of course I was joking too. (Wanna bet?)
Yes, but I SPECULATE that you want to use the funds to hurt bitcoin Wink
legendary
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
September 10, 2012, 07:45:14 AM
No, unfortunately. His joke does however continue to live on and will do so with comments like I took snippets from above.
'Bets' and 'Speculation'....lol

You have to admit, he at least managed to get a bit of his point across Wink

Of course I was joking too. (Wanna bet?)
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I heart thebaron
September 10, 2012, 07:29:03 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime.

I would bet ........ That's maybe the only way .......

No, unfortunately. His joke does however continue to live on and will do so with comments like I took snippets from above.
'Bets' and 'Speculation'....lol

You have to admit, he at least managed to get a bit of his point across Wink
BCB
vip
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1002
BCJ
September 10, 2012, 07:26:30 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime.

I would bet that he started this thing as a way to pump up the distressed Pirate's debt price while dumping his own share of it. That's maybe the only way his "joke" makes sense.

This clearly isn't about his "bet" it is something more deep-seated in older guard of the bitcoin community.  See MNW's (insincere) apology thread titled "Response"
legendary
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
September 10, 2012, 07:24:28 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime.

I would bet that he started this thing as a way to pump up the distressed Pirate's debt price while dumping his own share of it. That's maybe the only way his "joke" makes sense.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
September 10, 2012, 06:36:09 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime. It's stupid, I won't dispute that, and Matt deserves every bit of the backlash he's getting, but it's not criminal.

In real life promissory estoppel is criminal. You cannot promise something you can't provide and then appeal the contract to be void. I know many of us here including me advocate a lesser regulated justice but stuff like this is just naive.

Ahh. That's what I was looking for. Thanks, I'll look into it.

promissory estoppel
Quote
A promisor—one who makes a promise—makes a gratuitous promise that he should reasonably have expected to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee—one to whom a promise has been made. The promisee justifiably relies on the promise. A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance. Injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise.

In other words, He's incurred a debt. Like I said.
donator
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
September 10, 2012, 06:34:35 AM
I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime. It's stupid, I won't dispute that, and Matt deserves every bit of the backlash he's getting, but it's not criminal.

In real life promissory estoppel is criminal. You cannot promise something you can't provide and then appeal the contract to be void. I know many of us here including me advocate a lesser regulated justice but stuff like this is just naive.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
September 10, 2012, 06:25:43 AM
Matthew gained nothing financially, whereas Pirate actually stole other people's money.

matthew gained the chance to fleece people on a bet that he never intended to pay.  Do you people live in a ****ing fantasy world where this kind of behavior won't get you in serious trouble IRL?

I still don't see anywhere where making a bet you can't pay is a crime. It's stupid, I won't dispute that, and Matt deserves every bit of the backlash he's getting, but it's not criminal. I'd even go so far as to say it incurs a debt, since he agreed to pay, and didn't, but it's not like he stole from you, he just didn't pay.

The casino example is a good point. But here's the thing: They make you buy those chips. In other words, the casino is an escrow for that bet. This is more like walking up to a 3-card monte guy and being pissed off that he doesn't pay when you find the queen.
donator
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
September 10, 2012, 06:08:04 AM
He promised to give free bitcoins to everyone who showed him that they already have some. Of course this is suspect, and it's no surprise he did not keep his word. But really, I'm not even mad. Even if someone was trying to "hedge" against pirate's default, it would have been an "after-the-fact" hedge, they'd have lost their money already and were just trying to get them back through a free lottery ticket.

Matthew gained nothing financially, whereas Pirate actually stole other people's money.

matthew gained the chance to fleece people on a bet that he never intended to pay.  Do you people live in a ****ing fantasy world where this kind of behavior won't get you in serious trouble IRL?

A lot of people here are incredibly departed from reality. It takes a while to realise to what extent they live in a fantasy world.

Cue one of my fav gifs:
hero member
Activity: 615
Merit: 500
September 10, 2012, 06:05:49 AM
The small number of people I know who made bets were definitely planning to pay up if they lost the bet.

Matthew, go into a casino, put down $800,000 on black and after you lose, pick up the chips and say "just kidding."

Refusing escrow = red flag.  I had a bad feeling about Matthew long before the bet "settled."
sr. member
Activity: 672
Merit: 258
https://cryptassist.io
September 10, 2012, 06:00:22 AM
He promised to give free bitcoins to everyone who showed him that they already have some. Of course this is suspect, and it's no surprise he did not keep his word. But really, I'm not even mad. Even if someone was trying to "hedge" against pirate's default, it would have been an "after-the-fact" hedge, they'd have lost their money already and were just trying to get them back through a free lottery ticket.

Matthew gained nothing financially, whereas Pirate actually stole other people's money.

matthew gained the chance to fleece people on a bet that he never intended to pay.  Do you people live in a ****ing fantasy world where this kind of behavior won't get you in serious trouble IRL?
Pages:
Jump to: