P - page 17. | Bitcointalksearch.org

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 05:55:14 AM

Quote from: bitlane on August 29, 2012, 05:26:14 AM

It will be far easier for Pirate to settle multiple 50BTC accounts for 25BTC offers, than a 10,000BTC account for a 5,000BTC offer.

What does he do if people refuse his offer?

'Take it OR leave it baby...'

....and the Pirate classic 'come get me....enjoy the ride' (my personal favorite that he used on me).

The way I figure it is, if you take the time to NOW try and suppress your wife and family's online Social Media information, you may not be as 'secure' as you originally thought you once were.

markm

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1090

Quote

If I were you, I would wait till Christmas 2013 at which time BurtW will have over 1,000,000 BTC in his account from Interest and he can cover everyone's debts Wink

Wow, guys like that should come play in the Galactic Milieu, we have operations there that borrowed a grand at one percent a day (compounded hourly) well over a year ago, are up to 168370.06907000 this hour and are still expected to pay up. Though in fairness it should be acknowledged that they are now being run by repossession corps not by the original debtors...

-MarkM-

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: bitlane on August 29, 2012, 05:26:14 AM

It will be far easier for Pirate to settle multiple 50BTC accounts for 25BTC offers, than a 10,000BTC account for a 5,000BTC offer.

What does he do if people refuse his offer?

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: ?? on ??

What should I take for the 40k plus account? After all in a month it will be worth 50k!

If I were you, I would wait till Christmas 2013 at which time BurtW will have over 1,000,000 BTC in his account from Interest and he can cover everyone's debts Wink

Quote from: Frankie on August 28, 2012, 09:21:32 PM

Around Christmastime 2013, BurtW will post "Week 70: 1,065,321 coins. Heck yeah, over a million coins! Got anything that compares, Team Ponzi? I thought not."

Reference: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--97094

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

I still say it's all about the Benjamins....

It will be far easier for Pirate to settle multiple 50BTC accounts for 25BTC offers, than a 10,000BTC account for a 5,000BTC offer.

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: sadpandatech on August 29, 2012, 03:34:55 AM

I did think of something though. If what he is saying is true, that they need the list to make sure payouts are evenly distributed(no piotr_n, not because he can't trust goat), then why would it not suffice for a PPT OP to simply show how much of a depsoit are his own and how much are PPT shares?

How would that matter? If the even distribution is, say, 40%, then he could just pay 40% of both totals. It should make no difference to Pirate how his customers got the money he paid them or what they plan to do with the money he pays them.

Quote

This is assuming a lender for instance used the same deposit address with BS&T for their personal funds as they did for PPT procedes, which of course may also include funds from shares the PPT OP purchased, but would still be considered seperate from personal deposit amounts. *shrug*

I don't see how this could possibly matter. All Pirate needs to do is compute the total amount of money he owes to everyone and the total amount he has, then compute the payout percentage. Then he can take every debt and pay that percentage of that debt. He doesn't need to know anything about the source or destination of the payments.

Even if he bases the payout on more than just the amount it wouldn't matter. Say he pays off only principle and no interest. All the information he needs is the pay in and pay out dates. Individual balances don't do anything for him.

repentance

hero member

Activity: 868

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Bitcoin Oz on August 29, 2012, 03:21:18 AM

I suggest people contact the PPT operator and expressly forbid them from handing over any such identifying info. Payb.tc for instance is in Australia and there are massive fines for breaking the privacy act.

While it's true that financial service providers have a positive obligation to protect financial information and can be fined if they don't, they also have an obligation to with-hold tax if appropriate information such as TFNs and ABNs aren't provided and to report certain transactions to AUSTRAC as required by AML/CFT legislation. Services willing to risk the wrath of the ATO and AUSTRAC are unlikely to fear the Privacy Commissioner.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Bitcoin Oz on August 29, 2012, 03:21:18 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:15:56 AM

Quote from: sadpandatech on August 29, 2012, 03:13:56 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:08:24 AM

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

Whatever you may believe about Goat or Nefario aside. I can assure you that Pirate is looking out for #1 and his seeking individual PPT depositor info has zero to do with your feelings about Goat. Goat is only one of several large, and some much larger PPT's.

Except that few of the several large PPT's have no issues with giving Pirate the list of their customers, so he could pay them out directly - while the few others are treating him with lawyers.

I suggest people contact the PPT operator and expressly forbid them from handing over any such identifying info. Payb.tc for instance is in Australia and there are massive fines for breaking the privacy act.

I'm pretty sure no one will hand that stuff over. That troll is just crazy.

I concur and Piotr_n; " Chaang-Noi, I know it's not something you can do with bonds and have relayed that information but I don't have an answer for you yet."

I did think of something though. If what he is saying is true, that they need the list to make sure payouts are evenly distributed(no piotr_n, not because he can't trust goat), then why would it not suffice for a PPT OP to simply show how much of a depsoit are his own and how much are PPT shares? This is assuming a lender for instance used the same deposit address with BS&T for their personal funds as they did for PPT procedes, which of course may also include funds from shares the PPT OP purchased, but would still be considered seperate from personal deposit amounts. *shrug*

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 03:33:49 AM

You admire Pirate for defaulting on his obligations to Goat and Nefario because you think he might be trying to protect small investors from scams!? Huh

Yes.
Except that Pirate never had any obligations to Nefario.
Though, Nefario has earned shit lots of money from the PPT bonds.

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:08:24 AM

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy, even more today than I did 2 weeks ago.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

You admire Pirate for defaulting on his obligations to Goat and Nefario because you think he might be trying to protect small investors from scams!? Huh

Pirate has defaulted twice now. Do you have any evidence Goat and Nefario have ever failed to meet their obligations to depositors?

I honestly cannot believe that you are being serious. Maybe I'm naive.

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm pretty sure no one will hand that stuff over.

You wanna bet?

@bitcoin.me, what business do you have in this?

Bitcoin Oz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

Wat

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:15:56 AM

Quote from: sadpandatech on August 29, 2012, 03:13:56 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:08:24 AM

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

Whatever you may believe about Goat or Nefario aside. I can assure you that Pirate is looking out for #1 and his seeking individual PPT depositor info has zero to do with your feelings about Goat. Goat is only one of several large, and some much larger PPT's.

Except that few of the several large PPT's have no issues with giving Pirate the list of their customers, so he could pay them out directly - while the few others are treating him with lawyers.

I suggest people contact the PPT operator and expressly forbid them from handing over any such identifying info. Payb.tc for instance is in Australia and there are massive fines for breaking the privacy act.

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: sadpandatech on August 29, 2012, 03:13:56 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:08:24 AM

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

Whatever you may believe about Goat or Nefario aside. I can assure you that Pirate is looking out for #1 and his seeking individual PPT depositor info has zero to do with your feelings about Goat. Goat is only one of several large, and some much larger PPT's.

Except that few of the several large PPT's have no issues with giving Pirate the list of their customers, so he could pay them out directly - while the few others are treating him with lawyers.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 03:08:24 AM

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

Whatever you may believe about Goat or Nefario aside. I can assure you that Pirate is looking out for #1 and his seeking individual PPT depositor info has zero to do with your feelings about Goat. Goat is only one of several large, and some much larger PPT's.

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 03:05:00 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:54:51 AM

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 02:49:48 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:40:53 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

I'm sure he might. But that would unequivocally be him defaulting on his agreement with Goat.

Read again:

Quote from: pirateat40

Bitcoin Savings & Trust has hereby given notice of default to it's account holders.

So all the goat's lawyers can do now, is going to Texas to lick Pirate's balls - but only if he'd generously allow them to.

I thought you were arguing that this would be some scheme to get him out of default.

He's obviously going to loose the bets - but then he's protecting all the small investors from scams, like the one Goat and Nefario have tried to run.
For which I admire him. Though I should't say it, before getting my money back, but well - I trust the guy, even more today than I did 2 weeks ago.
If he doesn't pay back - then you can laugh at me as much as you want, for being so naive.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:54:51 AM

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 02:49:48 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:40:53 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

I'm sure he might. But that would unequivocally be him defaulting on his agreement with Goat.

Read again:

Quote from: pirateat40

Bitcoin Savings & Trust has hereby given notice of default to it's account holders.

So all the goat's lawyers can do now, is going to Texas to lick Pirate's balls - but only if he'd generously allow them to.

Though, the bond holders can still get their money back from BS&T - all they need to do is proving that they do own the bonds and there is no need to sue anyone.

yea, he read it. While that notice is fine for proving that he informed his creditors that he cannot at this time maintain the orginal contract to complete satisfaction. It is by no means to serve in lieu of a legal notice stating that Pirate is released from still maintaining the contract to the fullest extent of which he is capable of.

Has anyone seen a legal filing in TX from Mr. Pirate regarding this matter?

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:54:51 AM

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 02:49:48 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:40:53 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

I'm sure he might. But that would unequivocally be him defaulting on his agreement with Goat.

Read again:

Quote from: pirateat40

Bitcoin Savings & Trust has hereby given notice of default to it's account holders.

So all the goat's lawyers can do now, is going to Texas to lick Pirate's balls - but only if he'd generously allow them to.

I thought you were arguing that this would be some scheme to get him out of default.

piotr_n

legendary

Activity: 2053

Merit: 1356

aka tonikt

Quote from: JoelKatz on August 29, 2012, 02:49:48 AM

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:40:53 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

I'm sure he might. But that would unequivocally be him defaulting on his agreement with Goat.

Read again:

Quote from: pirateat40

Bitcoin Savings & Trust has hereby given notice of default to it's account holders.

So all the goat's lawyers can do now, is going to Texas to lick Pirate's balls - but only if he'd generously allow them to.

Though, the bond holders can still get their money back from BS&T - there is no need to sue anyone, all they need to do is proving that they do own the PPT bonds.
Which of course would go much smoother if Goat and Nefarion were willing to cooperate... but will they? Knowing these two crooks, I kind of doubt it.

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: piotr_n on August 29, 2012, 02:40:53 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

I'm sure he might. But that would unequivocally be him defaulting on his agreement with Goat.

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: ?? on ??

That last part is interesting. That means anyone under the sun can sue Pirate as long as they buy one bond.

Well, in the trivial sense, anyone can sue anyone for anything. And, of course, it's not worth a lawsuit over one bond unless you're in it for the lulz or the principle of the thing. But basically, yes. Anyone who holds a PPT could perhaps successfully sue Pirate, as an intended third party beneficiary, for breaching his agreement with the PPT operator. The legal reasoning is that the PPT operator doesn't have any incentive to sue, since it not their money. And it wouldn't be fair if nobody who was harmed by the breach had the right to sue. That would let criminals get away with murder.

This also applies if the PPT operators agree to settlement. But that would be a weaker argument that I'm not sure would work. The settlement harms the PPT holders compared to full compliance. And the same legal reasoning applies, it's not just to allow the PPT operators to be pressured into extinguishing the rights of their holders.

Topic: P - page 17. (Read 78397 times)