Topic: Scammer tag: PatrickHarnett (Read 39244 times)

I suppose that's true. I do hate how accurate that bastard is about so many things.

I think this was more on the scale of a Saintly, rather than Godly miracle of the sort that thread is concerned with.

Maybe another reason for God like status. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-mp-is-your-god-271711

I have his info.  PM sent.

Hi, this guy owes me 300 btc doe sanybody have his info or managed to get any  money back from him??

Yes.  Real world details about him and his wife are easy to track down.

Is this his real name, btw?

Is any body moving anything against Patrick??

It's not that simple. Greed is definitely a factor, and it's always underneath the surface. But it took more than just greed to allow Patrick to convince himself that he was helping people by loaning them money at self-evidently, non-sustainably usurious rates.

Ponzi schemes don't do that to people.  

GREED does that to people. And praying on your investors GREED is exactly how Ponzi schemes have and will continue to exist.

So I think the lesson in the wild west of bitcoin land is that a guy like Pirate sets up a Ponzi clearly with the intention of defrauding his investors, where as the dupped PPT's and Patrick Harnett, and Goat et al were just clueless lemmings along for the ride and then just disappear into the woodwork when the shit hits the fan.

After the Bitcoinica disaster, Amir seems to have going off the deep end.  Donald Newman has all but disappeared and Patrick Strateman is still plugging away insulting his clients in the intersango thread.

Zhou Toug has taken his ill gotten gains and started nameterrific.com and is living large as he continues his education.

A guy like Roman Shtylman suffers a devastating hack (or maybe he just blew all the money on that extended london trip) and continues his busniess as he attempts to recover.

Then there is M4v3R of bitmarket.eu who decides to invest (gamble) all his client fund in bitcoinica and lost and now he's trying to recover.

All the while PREYING on their investors/clients HOPE that maybe, just maybe, by some miracle the lost fund will be recovered  (yea at 0.05% of 30 years!) and they will all be made whole.  And you know what. I just might put a little more money back in to help them out.  Whaaaaattttttttttt!!!?

So I guess anyone in bitcoin land with little to no financial knowledge or experience and a little web design/computer skills (and a download of bootstrap) can open a bitcoin business, call themselves an "investment manager", a "exchange" a "pass through" or whatever, collect funds and then either knowingly or when things go south just close up shop claim a hack/scam/scandal and just walk away.

And so far it seem there will always be plenty of naive, clueless or just plan trusting investors/depositors to play along.

I love this place!

He still had a good reputation, but at that point, he knew he had debts much greater than he could ever repay and he had personally lost a good deal of money. It's easy to be honest and build up a good reputation when you're making money.

Patrick was essentially unknowingly running a Pirate pass through. So long as Pirate kept paying, he made money, his lenders made money, and his borrowers made money. But as soon as Pirate defaulted, Patrick knew that his borrowers would default as well.

The test of a person's character is what they do when times get tough. And it appears Patrick sold his investors down the river to bail himself out.

Up until Kraken he seemed, at least to me, to be a willfully ignorant fool, but honest. In fairness, Ponzi schemes somehow manage to do that to people, even smart people. Even skeptical people.

I don't think it was Kracken specifically which started to damage Patrick's rep - it really just put it beyond salvage - but more his promotion of pirate in general.  Once he aligned himself with a HYIP which was demonstrably unsustainable, he lost a lot of credibility in regard to risk assessment in general.  I think that's true of other lenders too.

Interesting.  But did anyone have a better rep then Patrick Harnett before Kracken?  Just seems odd.

pirate returned people's money on request at first, too (although he discouraged withdrawals by telling people that if they withdrew they may not be able to re-invest later).

Kraken was clearly designed for Patrick to hedge his own risk (and ultimately to dump his own toxic debt).  Just because you don't cut and run at the first opportunity doesn't mean you're not going to cut and run eventually.  My perception is that Patrick thought his experience in high-risk investments meant he'd come out ahead of the game and that the decision to "cut and run" was probably not made until it became obvious that he was so far behind the game that he couldn't catch up.

possibly because you would have rung the alarm bells early, and various schemes take more time and 'confidence' to maximize returns.

I put 100 BTC into Kraken when it first opened, since it was advertised as being "less safe than Starfish, but more safe than Pirate" or words to that effect.

Then I received the first bulletin, which said that almost all funds were invested in Pirate's scam.

I complained, saying that I understood Kraken wasn't going to be used for Pirate deposits and got my 100 BTC returned immediately.

I don't understand why he would return my deposit if it was intended as a scam from the outset.

I defend him only against unfair accusations. I am well aware that there are a number of fair accusations that can be made against him! For example, Kraken appears to be a pure scam.

Truly, I'm puzzled by Joel's defense of Mr. Starfish, especially after Patrick's default and disappearance. I can think of few scammers in this cesspool who are more blatant and deserve less sympathy than Patrick.

I'd be up for that...he's already got the scammer tag.

I didn't have much with him...but I might as well get something back.

Patrick owes me about $1000-$1500 too.

However, I may be able to assist with this partially. Patrick Harnett was a CPA investor. His debt to CPA does not total what we owe him (there are leftover shares). I will be contacting Patrick shortly and asking him what he wants to do with his shares -- as soon as my assets are set up on BTCT. He may decide to claim them but, if he receives a scammer tag first (or does he already have one?) then when I liquidate his shares I do not mind applying the liquidated value of the remaining shares to some of his debts.

I'd propose to liquidate his shares for fair market value, and pay off some of his debts for him. This would depend on community support; i'd want to see him with a scammer tag (obviously) before I would consider doing this, and I would want support from burnside/BTCT and/or the majority of the community in order to take that action. I don't want this backfiring on me later. Comments? Would that be the right thing to do?