Do more people have a balance of 0 zero... 
farl4web, 23c is a 'special' version, actually only for claim. Many have 0 as balance. It's important you have your iotas in the HISTORY tab.
Ok, thanks. That seems to be right.
Topic: [IOTA] IOTA Speculation - page 99. (Read 171575 times)
farl4web, 23c is a 'special' version, actually only for claim. Many have 0 as balance. It's important you have your iotas in the HISTORY tab.
Ok, thanks. That seems to be right.
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
agreed, it was not the best analogy.
It just goes against my sense of justice that it's not scamming when I want to buy something (from a stranger or not) and he keeps my money and runs away.
I'll drop out of the discussion.
Please try to answer the question:
How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Your personal opinion/ sense of justice doesn't matter when it come to the Law. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding.
Jeez, it's not the same thing, that's why it's an analogy.
And thank you for the article, it tells me that theft by finding is a crime in some jurisdictions if the subject did not take reasonable steps to locate the owner.And in the jurisdiction of my country, it's a crime if a seller does not honor his part of a purchasing contract.
I think you made your point clear, you think that someone who stole money is not a scammer, thank you.
As I said, I expressed my concerns but I seem to be the only one here.
And No I don't think someone who steals is not a scammer/thieve.
But let's focus on the Iota launch, and agree to disagree.
Do more people have a balance of 0 zero...
yes, but I think (maybe CfB could confirm here) it's because you claimed with 0.9.23beta GUI.
Do more people have a balance of 0 zero...
farl4web, 23c is a 'special' version, actually only for claim. Many have 0 as balance. It's important you have your iotas in the HISTORY tab.
I see you are strengthening your arguments by using memes...
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
I use meme when I suspect that someone is trolling. Here is why I'm 100% sure that account is still in his posession:
1. He told me it's his account
2. He has several obligations pending, hence he couldn't sell the seed to that account
Any flaw in this logic?
Please, I am disappointed in the 'suspect trolling' argument.
Ofcourse he can sell the account + seed, why not, this deal could be made without your knowledge.
But since I am the only one that is concerned about this, I will leave it at that.
Do more people have a balance of 0 zero...
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
agreed, it was not the best analogy.
It just goes against my sense of justice that it's not scamming when I want to buy something (from a stranger or not) and he keeps my money and runs away.
I'll drop out of the discussion.
Please try to answer the question:
How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Your personal opinion/ sense of justice doesn't matter when it come to the Law. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding.
Jeez, it's not the same thing, that's why it's an analogy.
And thank you for the article, it tells me that theft by finding is a crime in some jurisdictions if the subject did not take reasonable steps to locate the owner.And in the jurisdiction of my country, it's a crime if a seller does not honor his part of a purchasing contract.
I think you made your point clear, you think that someone who stole money is not a scammer, thank you.
This discussion is boring and pointless. The decision has been made. 
If you can't win an argument don't be a sour loser and make in personal.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
CH said he will keep some iotas for himself. CH told me his account.
So, why I can't be sure?
I see you are strengthening your arguments by using memes...
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
why are you so active about this?
you made your point.
do you know CH?
I see you are strengthening your arguments by using memes...
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
I use meme when I suspect that someone is trolling. Here is why I'm 100% sure that account is still in his posession:
1. He told me it's his account
2. He has several obligations pending, hence he couldn't sell the seed to that account
Any flaw in this logic?
If you can't win an argument don't be a sour loser and make in personal.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
CH said he will keep some iotas for himself. CH told me his account.
So, why I can't be sure?
I see you are strengthening your arguments by using memes...
I hate repeating myself but here goes:
You can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
agreed, it was not the best analogy.
It just goes against my sense of justice that it's not scamming when I want to buy something (from a stranger or not) and he keeps my money and runs away.
I'll drop out of the discussion.
Please try to answer the question:
How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Your personal opinion/ sense of justice doesn't matter when it come to the Law. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding.
If you can't win an argument don't be a sour loser and make in personal.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
CH said he will keep some iotas for himself. CH told me his account.
So, why I can't be sure?
No, that depends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Hehe, you defend CH so furiously like he is your younger brother. Tell him his account is frozen and he should come here to sort out the issue before the 10th of July.
If you can't win an argument don't be a sour loser and make in personal.
You just can't be sure 100% that the account is still in his possession, unless you are the owner of the account.
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
agreed, it was not the best analogy.
It just goes against my sense of justice that it's not scamming when I want to buy something (from a stranger or not) and he keeps my money and runs away.
I'll drop out of the discussion.
No, that depends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Hehe, you defend CH so furiously like he is your younger brother. Tell him his account is frozen and he should come here to sort out the issue before the 10th of July.
Imo no scamming took place: sending btc to a random, unnown, drunk on the internet is just stupid.
Sending btc to a random, unnown drunk on the internet and being warned multiple times is just retarded.
Sending btc to a random, unnown drunk on the internet and being warned multiple times is just retarded.
If you leave your purse on the street it's not stealing if someone takes it?
No, that depends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding
Also: How is leaving your purse on the streets and actively sending money to a complete stranger the same thing?
Decentralisation is a big part of Iota as well, for security and transparancy reasons. If not why not just centralise?
Not yet. IOTA is quite centralized at the moment, and that's a good thing at this stage. It didn't launch yet, so the devs are free to freeze a scammers account.
Ofcourse, since there is no official network yet. But I am talking about the general vision on decentralisation.
If decentralisation would not matter why not use a centralised system. These system have proven to work, on the insuring both parties part. (creditcard companies, banks)
Decentralisation is a big part of Iota as well, for security and transparancy reasons. If not why not just centralise?
Not yet. IOTA is quite centralized at the moment, and that's a good thing at this stage. It didn't launch yet, so the devs are free to freeze a scammers account.
Since you brought this up and you are freezing Child_Harolds account, how did you get his seed? And how do you know it's his?
He told me.
Jump to: