Pages:
Author

Topic: Mattew N. Wright still passing off a scam in the past as just a "prank" - page 2. (Read 3366 times)

hero member
Activity: 557
Merit: 500
Quote
Don't think pirate will payout as promised?
If you truly believe that Pirate is a scam/ponzi, then this is a no-brainer easy money for you.

Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread.

To make your bets easier to read, please stick to the following format:
Code:
20BTC
13dSK4663Ts7j2PwHS1eUVjycKLBwx7PJM
Optional comment

The above post would be betting 20BTC that he in fact is not going to payout as described. If I lose the bet, you get 20BTC sent to that address. If you lose, you'll need to send 20BTC to my address.

Anyone (including myself) who renigs on their bets will be labeled a scammer on the forums. Theymos will retain the IP addresses of everyone who has committed here and as you are marked a scammer for not paying, you will also be reported to the bitcoin police and tracked. For this reason, it is important that you do not bet more than you can afford to lose. Considering the high probability of fraud from newbie sockpuppets, only established 250+ post users will be allowed to participate, unless they participate through an escrow who will hold their coins. This is up to them to find the escrow although many posters in this thread have agreed to act as such.

The minimum commitment is 0.1BTC. The maximum default bet for normal users is currently 1000BTC per person. If you would like to wager more, please PM so that I may do a more extensive verification of identity and holdings. Thanks.

Disclaimer: Although I think pirate is a high risk venture due to a complete lack of transparency on his part, I am sorely reminded that the forum needs to be taught a lesson when it comes to crying wolf on things without evidence. It's getting sickening. "SCAM! SCAM! SCAM!". So put your money where your mouth and bet for a better bitcoin forum/community overall.


For the record, the address to remit your funds to if you indeed lose is 13dSK4663Ts7j2PwHS1eUVjycKLBwx7PJM

Thank you and good luck!

I reserve the right to lock this thread and stop accepting additional bets at any time. All existing bets in the thread will still be honored regardless.

Bold and italic is my emphasis.  How this guy isn't banned is beyond me.  The community is asking for it.
hero member
Activity: 557
Merit: 500
Thanks for sharing your opinion smoothie. I'm not sure if I can call it a "wrong" opinion just because I hadn't realized or acted on any supposed benefits, but I admit that once I heard the speculative arguments from some intelligent community members I knew what kind of mistake I made and that it wouldn't be easy to forget about and move on. As for your own bet, you're on a long list of people I haven't neglected contacting, and the second your turn is up you'll get a super happy message from me.  Smiley

I will be waiting.

Please let us know the outcome.  Thanks, smoothie.
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
Thanks for sharing your opinion smoothie. I'm not sure if I can call it a "wrong" opinion just because I hadn't realized or acted on any supposed benefits, but I admit that once I heard the speculative arguments from some intelligent community members I knew what kind of mistake I made and that it wouldn't be easy to forget about and move on. As for your own bet, you're on a long list of people I haven't neglected contacting, and the second your turn is up you'll get a super happy message from me.  Smiley

I will be waiting.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Thanks for sharing your opinion smoothie. I'm not sure if I can call it a "wrong" opinion just because I hadn't realized or acted on any supposed benefits, but I admit that once I heard the speculative arguments from some intelligent community members I knew what kind of mistake I made and that it wouldn't be easy to forget about and move on. As for your own bet, you're on a long list of people I haven't neglected contacting, and the second your turn is up you'll get a super happy message from me.  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
This is my personal perspective because I entered into about a 1500 BTC bet with him which Matthew backed out of.

He is currently supposed to be repaying me based on our agreed terms from Feb of this year. I have not been paid yet nor have I heard from Matthew about it recently.

Anyways back to my perspective on the "bet" or "prank". The "prank" in my view was a scam. It was a blatant lie which gave Matthew an unfair advantage concerning buying/selling pirate debt.

Calling an agreement that you back out of a "prank" is like saying that BFL is now backing out of their 1000 BTC bet (given they had malicious intentions in stating they would meet their said specs and did not) and then for them to call their bet a "prank".

Matthew, call it what you want, but I call it a scam.

Still waiting for some sort of update on our agree terms to settle our bet under the new terms agreed to in PM.

Anytime you wanna update me would be appreciated.

Thanks  Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Reneging on a bet is 100% a scam
After the bet ended and I took a leave of absence I had some time to think over the matter and came to the same conclusion, hence my return to make things right. (In that if I believe that reneging on even the most ridiculous bets makes me a scammer, then I cannot let that happen now can I).

Your "prank" pumped up the value of bad pirate debt
Lack of foresight on my part. The network effect was something I hadn't really planned on and adds to the immaturity of the bet in the first place. I've learned a valuable lesson about bothering with people and their money and would prefer to stay out of it in the future. That said, it is not my "fault" people were greedy. It is merely my fault for misrepresenting and assuming people would get the joke and instead not be offended. It just shows you how detached from the reality of the situation I was at the time.

You caused people

I didn't cause anyone to do anything. They all made their own choices. That said, I feel *bad* about their choices and have thus decided to settle with people, despite the fact that many of them are scammers who would not have paid if they lost. This point keeps getting brushed over in an attempt to paint me as some kind of a scammer, but people have already publicly and privately admitted that they had no intention of paying if they lost as they knew the bet was a giant troll. I still stood for my principles and began to pay people despite that. Write that one in your history books. I already have and I consider it to be nothing more than a stupid tax.
sr. member
Activity: 457
Merit: 250
Look for the bear necessities!!
Reneging on a bet is 100% a scam, if you fail to see this then not only are you a scammer, but an idiot as well.

Your "prank" pumped up the value of bad pirate debt as people sought to hedge against your bet, guaranteeing a win no matter the outcome (the mere possibility of this shows how outrageous the bet was though... but people get blinded by greed)

I wanted to bet against you and even posted in the thread but you refused to escrow so I chose not to...

But many people did bet against you.

You caused people to buy bad pirate debt (and lose all that money) as they hedged against your bet!!!
legendary
Activity: 1552
Merit: 1047
Disclaimer : I did not have a wager with MNW.


MNW set up a wagering scheme last year.  This scheme was set up in such a way where it was impossible for him to lose and impossible for anyone else to win.  He took in wagers knowing that there was the escape clause of calling the wager a "joke" or a "lesson" or whatever if he lost.  There was many opportunities for him to stop the wager and come clean - he didn't.   
It wasn't really setup in such way, it went more like this:


Quote
If the wager went in his favor, do you think the outcome of calling it a "prank" would have occurred?  In my mind, absolutely not. 
I agree.
hero member
Activity: 557
Merit: 500
You have no integrity, and you demonstrate that post after post. You are NOT TO BE TRUSTED, and this is clear to everybody in these forums.

I would agree were it not for this thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1497432

This looks like repentance to me.

Reading this, he seems to be on the right track.  When all of the wagering parties have been compensated (except a reasonable time period for "no response" individuals), let him make the case for the title removal.
hero member
Activity: 557
Merit: 500
Disclaimer : I did not have a wager with MNW.


MNW set up a wagering scheme last year.  This scheme was set up in such a way where it was impossible for him to lose and impossible for anyone else to win.  He took in wagers knowing that there was the escape clause of calling the wager a "joke" or a "lesson" or whatever if he lost.  There was many opportunities for him to stop the wager and come clean - he didn't.   

If the wager went in his favor, do you think the outcome of calling it a "prank" would have occurred?  In my mind, absolutely not. 

If MNW started another wager now, would anyone on this board bet against him?  You'd have to be an idiot to do so. 

A wager is a trust and a contract.  In some places, welching on a bet may cost you your life.  In my opinion, if you had pulled this stunt anywhere else besides an Internet forum, I'd be constantly looking over my shoulder until those "prank wagers" were paid off.  You should consider yourself lucky. 

"Untrustworthy" is more than fitting.  A lot of people had trust in you by making a wager with you.  Unless every person that had a wager with you was compensated, I'd say let the title stick. 
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!
You have no integrity, and you demonstrate that post after post. You are NOT TO BE TRUSTED, and this is clear to everybody in these forums.

I would agree were it not for this thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1497432

This looks like repentance to me.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
GTFO TLDR; all this legal mumbo-jumbo and whining

hon·or [on-er]
noun

1. honesty, fairness, or integrity in one's beliefs, actions, and words

Ask Theymos for a "dishonorable" tag.
full member
Activity: 159
Merit: 100
GTFO TLDR; all this legal mumbo-jumbo and whining

hon·or [on-er]
noun

1. honesty, fairness, or integrity in one's beliefs, actions, and words
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
If you accept the fact that people trusted in him, regardless of his underlaying intent and he failed to follow through with what he said he would do then I completely agree, untrustworthy is an appropriate tag

The problem with a general "untrustworthy" tag is that it's highly subjective. There are many who trust me immensely, and for good reason (it benefits them to do so). They may not trust me for making public bets with millions of dollars I don't have, but people trust me with funds, business decisions and management on a daily basis. If the tag were "untrustworthy with public bets" (aka deadbeat) then it might even be more appropriate, except then it wouldn't make sense when I have settled with the last better. The way I see it, this topic is something to be discussed *after* I've finished settling with everyone. At that point, I highly doubt even Theymos himself could sufficiently argue a need for any tag.

Prank or not, scam or not, he has made great progress resolving the issue - whatever you choose to call it:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1497432

In the long run that is all that really matters.  People make mistakes, they pay for their mistakes, they learn and grow - I know I have.

I hadn't seen this thread before. Apologies if my previous post came off as condemning you (it really wasn't meant to).

I remember the first time I came across your posts from when I first joined. They were so raw with youth and people wouldn't give you a chance.

I left the forums for about a year and came back to the whole Pirate debacle.

I imagine there's been plenty of time for personal growth since those early posts and it's humbling to see you're still working hard to build a community and that you're doing your best to correct a mistake.

All the best Smiley

I appreciate that. Something people may not know is how badly it hurt seeing my own friends (people like Erik Voorhees) turn against me publicly. It was a real turning point for me when my own friends couldn't handle my behavior. It forced me to look at myself and whom I was really hurting.

Although I appreciate the hypothesis presented for consideration, I know what I am and what I am not. I can most certainly live with a few people in the world thinking poorly of me on a forum for my past mistakes and even the occasional dramatic accusation. The way I see it, all I need to do is make sure in the future I don't let myself into situations against where such accusations can ever be considered "founded" and I suppose I'll be fine.


full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 101
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1018
"Surely matthew would have taken the money if he had won"
"There is no way he wasn't serious because no one would have gone to such lengths to troll"

Everytime I read opinions like these itjiat reminds me how scattered and poor and poorly I've presented myself the last two years. I'm quite happy I'm not suffering from that problem as badly these days and I accept that the owners of windows I broke will always think what they want, but my integrity is not up for bargaining.

What I'm doing now is basically settling that I crossed a line when I fooled others whom I thought were ignorant at the time (I was a bit manic). The several bitcoiners who lived with me can attest to the constant laughing and making fun of super serious old men who thought they'd win millions of dollars from a forum bet. It wasn't the right way to handle those people. Looking back, I'm ashamed I didn't take the high road. I'm more ashamed I put myself into a situation where others could so easily start threads questioning my integrity and not be immediately laughed at.

Life is hardly over though, and I'm happy to be given a chance to make things right for everyone who was involved. As for people who weren't involved, my advice would be to stop putting people in situations that require so much trust in the first place. That's the only lesson that matters for you.

You have no integrity, and you demonstrate that post after post. You are NOT TO BE TRUSTED, and this is clear to everybody in these forums.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
"Surely matthew would have taken the money if he had won"
"There is no way he wasn't serious because no one would have gone to such lengths to troll"

Everytime I read opinions like these it just reminds me how scattered and poorly I've presented myself the last two years (anyone who knows me knows to what lengths I used to go to do something funny or mess with people). I'm quite happy I'm not suffering from that problem as badly these days and I accept that the owners of windows I broke will always think what they want, but my integrity is not up for bargaining.

What I'm doing now is basically settling that I crossed a line when I fooled others whom I thought were ignorant at the time (I was a bit manic). The several bitcoiners who lived with me can attest to the constant laughing and making fun of super serious old men who thought they'd win millions of dollars from a forum bet. It wasn't the right way to handle those people. Looking back, I'm ashamed I didn't take the high road. I'm more ashamed I put myself into a situation where others could so easily start threads questioning my integrity and not be immediately laughed at.

Life is hardly over though, and I'm happy to be given a chance to make things right for everyone who was involved. As for people who weren't involved, my advice would be to stop putting people in situations that require so much trust in the first place. That's the only lesson that matters for you.
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!
Prank or not, scam or not, he has made great progress resolving the issue - whatever you choose to call it:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1497432

In the long run that is all that really matters.  People make mistakes, they pay for their mistakes, they learn and grow - I know I have.

I hadn't seen this thread before. Apologies if my previous post came off as condemning you (it really wasn't meant to).

I remember the first time I came across your posts from when I first joined. They were so raw with youth and people wouldn't give you a chance.

I left the forums for about a year and came back to the whole Pirate debacle.

I imagine there's been plenty of time for personal growth since those early posts and it's humbling to see you're still working hard to build a community and that you're doing your best to correct a mistake.

All the best Smiley
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Uhh sorry to jump in here because I guess it's none of my business, but I don't see why you have a scammer tag.
You didn't take any money, therefore it wasn't a scam.
[snip]
It dilutes the meaning of the tag to have you carrying it if this is the only reason.

Contracts 101.  
Any agreement whether verbal, or written is considered a valid contract binding on both parties unless it fails certain criteria.
[snip]
p.s.  I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, just armchair analysis.

OHAI Nova!  In your first post, you argue that giving Mathew a scammer tag dilutes its meaning, and seamlessly segway into trying to prove that *all the transactions on these forums* fail to meet the legal criteria for binding contracts.  Do you mean to say a scammer tag is *never* appropriate on these forums, and if so, why is it bad to "dilute [its] meaning"?
An important caveat:  Yes, arguing to the alternative is very rakish, but only if you know what you're doing.  Otherwise it's called "contradicting yourself." (an occupational hazzard in armchair law) Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
Prank or not, scam or not, he has made great progress resolving the issue - whatever you choose to call it:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1497432

In the long run that is all that really matters.  People make mistakes, they pay for their mistakes, they learn and grow - I know I have.
Pages:
Jump to: