If I refuse to redeem that RippleBTC for actual BTC, I'm not a scammer, and you're just an idiot for accepting a debt-based currency that anyone can inflate.
Relevant.I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements.
Topic: 'I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements." -Theymos (Read 1368 times)
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
If I agree to send you a RippleBTC
Irrelevant.
That said, I believe TradeFortress's original thread said "send you Bitcoins through Ripple".
We can discuss this in another thread (maybe one of the many TradeFortess ones?) but here I'd like to have Theymos respond to the question and not get sidetracked by off-topic discussion because I think the question is a very fundamental one to the way thing are done around here and deserve a clear answer.
we're asking Theymos for clarification of his response in one of those threads as it carries with it some complicated implications.
Seems pretty simple to me.If I agree to send you a RippleBTC and don't send you a RippleBTC, I'm a scammer. If I refuse to redeem that RippleBTC for actual BTC, I'm not a scammer, and you're just an idiot for accepting a debt-based currency that anyone can inflate.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
'Cause all he said was that he'd give people ripple bitcoins.
We're not talking about TradeFortress here though, we're asking Theymos for clarification of his response in one of those threads as it carries with it some complicated implications.
That said, I believe TradeFortress's original thread said "send you Bitcoins through Ripple".
It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Yet somehow you managed to do so.
Or more accurately, "I have zero trust in the redeemability of Ripple IOUs."
He's an admin, what he says here publicly is reflective of his policies in moderating. This is why I am asking for clarification. It simply struck me an odd thing for an admin to say in relation to whether something was considered a fraud or not. It deserves further clarification, and I am awaiting his response.
'Cause all he said was that he'd give people ripple bitcoins.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Yet somehow you managed to do so.
Or more accurately, "I have zero trust in the redeemability of Ripple IOUs."
He's an admin, what he says here publicly is reflective of his policies in moderating. This is why I am asking for clarification. It simply struck me an odd thing for an admin to say in relation to whether something was considered a fraud or not. It deserves further clarification, and I am awaiting his response.
It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Yet somehow you managed to do so.
Or more accurately, "I have zero trust in the redeemability of Ripple IOUs."
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
The agreement needs to explicitly say what these IOUs mean.
Do you feel the agreement by TradeFortress explicitly said what the IOUs meant? If so, why did a moderator need to give warnings all over the post at a later date?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/1-free-ripple-btc-giveaway-ended-see-op-over-455-btc-gaveaway-206948
I'm trying to get a better idea of the reasoning behind the actions (and sometimes lack of action in some cases). It will help the rest of the community know what is and what is not acceptable. It is my sincere hope that none of these issues will be explained using double standards (or removed completely by other mods).
You can't send bitcoins through Ripple. You can only send Bitcoin IOUs. The agreement needs to explicitly say what these IOUs mean. Saying that you'll send "Ripple bitcoins" or even "bitcoins via Ripple" is meaningless. You need to say something like, "I'll send Ripple BTC IOUs that can be redeemed from me for actual bitcoins at any time."
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
I don't recognize Ripple IOUs themselves as binding agreements. Alone, a Ripple IOU is meaningless. You can obviously have separate agreements that define Ripple IOUs to mean something. It would be ridiculous for anyone to say that just because you're using Ripple IOUs, other binding agreements are invalidated.
Thank you for the more in depth response. What I meant is, is it okay for someone to promise delivery of "bitcoins" through Ripple IOU as part of *any* agreement here on the forum, with full knowledge that those people will not in fact be able to receive them (thus scamming of expected value)?
I don't recognize Ripple IOUs themselves as binding agreements. Alone, a Ripple IOU is meaningless. You can obviously have separate agreements that define Ripple IOUs to mean something. It would be ridiculous for anyone to say that just because you're using Ripple IOUs, other binding agreements are invalidated.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Yet somehow you managed to do so.
Well, when you have a moment to type a meaningful response, could you explain exactly your stance on people scamming others of expected value through Ripple IOUs, with TradeFortress' thread as an example?
It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Yet somehow you managed to do so.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Ripple IOUs them alone may not be recognized as binding agreements, but there may be a separate agreement
Theymos is the one who needs to clarify what he said, not you. It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Also, is this topic about "a sign of corruption and bias" or is it about theymos' interpolation?
Ripple IOUs them alone may not be recognized as binding agreements, but there may be a separate agreement
Theymos is the one who needs to clarify what he said, not you. It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
Also, is this topic about "a sign of corruption and bias" or is it about theymos' interpolation?
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Ripple IOUs them alone may not be recognized as binding agreements, but there may be a separate agreement
Theymos is the one who needs to clarify what he said, not you. It's pretty hard to misinterpret "I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements."
This is absolutely absurd to me why someone would not get a scammer tag for promising value over a medium they knowingly have no intention of paying through. In your case, we all know it was a prank (many knew my pranks were pranks as well), but many might not have. For those few, I think it's is Theymos' duty (as well as other moderators) to stick with the principle of being anti-deception in general, not selective as Theymos' statement clearly paints.
A good start to that would be a simple and clear response from Theymos, not having your responses deleted by moderators seconds after making them.
I think it would be relevant, but there's an obvious response (which I've replied):
It's not even about your particular (completely inappropriate) prank, it's about Theymos' criteria for scammer tags and his exact wording:
"I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements." -Theymos
What he's actually saying is, "I'm okay with any kind of fraud and scam so long as the transfers only happen inside Ripple as IOUs".
There's already a dozen threads about your scammer case, try to keep it there. Not everything needs to be about you.
Please refrain from posting off-topic in this thread BadBear. I'm sorry that my bet hurt you and lessened your opinion of me. This has nothing to do with that. We're talking about what Theymos said.
I don't think there's much for me to say that is on topic here actually, given it is "Moderator mistake or sign of corruption and bias?"
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
I think it would be relevant, but there's an obvious response (which I've replied):
It's not even about your particular (completely inappropriate) prank, it's about Theymos' criteria for scammer tags and his exact wording:
"I don't recognize Ripple IOUs as binding agreements." -Theymos
What he's actually saying is, "I'm okay with any kind of fraud and scam so long as the transfers only happen inside Ripple as IOUs".
There's already a dozen threads about your scammer case, try to keep it there. Not everything needs to be about you.
Please refrain from posting off-topic in this thread BadBear. I'm sorry that my bet hurt you and lessened your opinion of me. This has nothing to do with that. We're talking about the ridiculous thing Theymos said, which basically equated to "I will choose to ignore any fraud that happens so long as the scammer utilizes the Ripple IOU system".
Bulanula pulled that kind of stunt often as well, every scammer case that was marginally popular was totally relevant to his case because x.
There's already a dozen threads about your scammer case, try to keep it there. Not everything needs to be about you.
There's already a dozen threads about your scammer case, try to keep it there. Not everything needs to be about you.
I think it would be relevant, but there's an obvious response (which I've replied):
Well, if you are OK with getting paid in Ripple IOUs issued that can't be redeemed.
I have not said that I will let you redeem the BTC, I've even implied that you wouldn't be able to. It would be a clear and shut case if I told people that I would send them a bitcoin via ripple that they can redeem from me, versus sending them a Ripple BTC - which are not BTC.
It's like those 5 BTC coins with no value / private key on them that were selling recently, you know? They say 5 BTC, they are not 5 BTC, they don't have the private key of 5 BTC. When someone sells that for 0.04 each (or even free, in this case), crying in scammer accusations isn't going to help you - even if the seller didn't explicitly state that "they cannot be redeemed by BTCs". Example:
Casascius.com:
Now this would be an agreement. Or something similar, especially if it's signed.
An arbitrary token of an IOU with no terms attached is not. I would have broken an agreement if I used Ripple to send BTCs where I had redemption / repayment terms, and broke that.
Ripple is the same thing. It's OpenCoin Inc's fault for saying "send money" on their website, when Ripple is incapable of sending money other than XRP.
I have not said that I will let you redeem the BTC, I've even implied that you wouldn't be able to. It would be a clear and shut case if I told people that I would send them a bitcoin via ripple that they can redeem from me, versus sending them a Ripple BTC - which are not BTC.
It's like those 5 BTC coins with no value / private key on them that were selling recently, you know? They say 5 BTC, they are not 5 BTC, they don't have the private key of 5 BTC. When someone sells that for 0.04 each (or even free, in this case), crying in scammer accusations isn't going to help you - even if the seller didn't explicitly state that "they cannot be redeemed by BTCs". Example:
Casascius.com:
Quote
Each piece has its own Bitcoin address and a redeemable "private key" on the inside, underneath the hologram.
Now this would be an agreement. Or something similar, especially if it's signed.
An arbitrary token of an IOU with no terms attached is not. I would have broken an agreement if I used Ripple to send BTCs where I had redemption / repayment terms, and broke that.
Ripple is the same thing. It's OpenCoin Inc's fault for saying "send money" on their website, when Ripple is incapable of sending money other than XRP.
Jump to: