blah blah blah - trolls are getting old and rather uninteresting
I was advised recently (last hour or so) that I now have an imposter on IRC. that's getting really sad - I hope whoever it is has a real life
Topic: Starfish BCB - Loans and Deposits - page 16. (Read 60537 times)
Been visiting my elderly father - somewhat more important than feeding the trolls here.
My regards; hope he's doing well.
He has never behaved less than impeccably in his business here yet since Pirate's gone he's the next easy target.
I have as much right as you to be here but I get called ''shill'' (whatever that means) etc. I guess I make an easy target.
I have as much right as you to be here but I get called ''shill'' (whatever that means) etc. I guess I make an easy target.
I don't think it's insomuch that Patrick is an easy target as that everyone offering interest (at least that I have seen) is being targeted or has been targeted in the past few weeks.
'Shill' is a derogatory term used to indicate a company/service advocate claiming no relation with the company. Whomever has called you that probably needs to reread a dictionary, as you've disclosed your relationship pretty clearly.
Again, you don't make an easier target than many - everyone remotely connected with any interest-providing service, and plenty not connected, are being trolled. A few for good reason, but most just because of a large amount of general animosity, a few instigators who the 'mob' of trolls follow like sheep, and some major fallout from multiple defaults, mainly Pirate, in a small period of time. It will pass eventually, don't take it personally.
I do wonder why you spend time on these forums, but then again most days I wonder why I spend time on these forums.
He has never behaved less than impeccably in his business here yet since Pirate's gone he's the next easy target.
Has he yet disclosed to his investors what obligations he has, what assets he will use to cover those obligations, and what losses are being passed on to them? If not, I'd say he's behaving at least a bit less than impeccably. 
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
I think you are giving him too much credit. His other actions strongly suggest that he knows fully well the likely consequences. His posting tactics (including those of his wife -- sorry, it's true) seem to go a bit too far for him to be just an "honest fool."
Let's see how moderate your language would be when your dearly beloved is being trolled FOR NO REASON! He has never behaved less than impeccably in his business here yet since Pirate's gone he's the next easy target.
I have as much right as you to be here but I get called ''shill'' (whatever that means) etc. I guess I make an easy target.
It in no way can help the community when a new person comes to the forums and every thread that mentions prominant characters on the forum suddenly gets a response explaining how that person is scamming
I think it helps quite a bit. For one thing, it means that there are some honest people remaining.
Haven't read much of the thread. . . Has the grown man who is a fan of children's TV shows and who rates every scam AAA+++ wound down his own investment program scam yet?
Maybe it's the booze, but his latest posts seem to grant that some skullduggery occured (but the fault of someone else, of course). But he's holding fast! There has been some purging of records, too. A nice touch -- very Arthur Andersen.
Strangely, his wife has disappeared. A shame really. I do love me a good shillin' 4 times a day.
Been visiting my elderly father - somewhat more important than feeding the trolls here.
Well, that rules me out. Thankfully you said 'respected member'......
It's nice to know where I stand at times like this
It's nice to know where I stand at times like this
In other news, I've spent several hours today working with someone that borrowed from me some months ago, working on getting back around 800 coins. What is pissing me off is that while we are trying to work out a solution so I can get more coins back to people quickly, a "respected" member of the forum is trying to get them to default by stealing/devaluing an asset they hold.
I deleted the OP material because I was continuing to get requests for accounts and being asked to take deposits. As it was quite clear in this thread that I'm shutting things down, having mis-information available seemed counter intuitive. I understand the "evidence" will be construed anyway the trolls like, but that is not my concern or interest.
I will be doing a pro-rata payment today based on a loan that was repaid. I have received 20 requests for withdrawals this week, so they will be pooled as advised. Also, I don't intend to do daily payments, it will align with the weekly interest payments that I have been running on Fridays.
I will be doing a pro-rata payment today based on a loan that was repaid. I have received 20 requests for withdrawals this week, so they will be pooled as advised. Also, I don't intend to do daily payments, it will align with the weekly interest payments that I have been running on Fridays.
Thanks Patrick!
I deleted the OP material because I was continuing to get requests for accounts and being asked to take deposits. As it was quite clear in this thread that I'm shutting things down, having mis-information available seemed counter intuitive. I understand the "evidence" will be construed anyway the trolls like, but that is not my concern or interest.
I will be doing a pro-rata payment today based on a loan that was repaid. I have received 20 requests for withdrawals this week, so they will be pooled as advised. Also, I don't intend to do daily payments, it will align with the weekly interest payments that I have been running on Fridays.
I will be doing a pro-rata payment today based on a loan that was repaid. I have received 20 requests for withdrawals this week, so they will be pooled as advised. Also, I don't intend to do daily payments, it will align with the weekly interest payments that I have been running on Fridays.
The beloved PatrickHarnett pulled yet another classic scammer move, deleting your OP to cover up the month-over-month lies he used to post (something Pirate did too) why delete the financials that this community praised you for posting, saying that you were so open and honest about your borrowing program?
(any chance Joel Katz or Dooglus has the full list before he deleted?)
(any chance Joel Katz or Dooglus has the full list before he deleted?)
I'm not sure what list you're asking for, but I don't have a copy of any of Patrick's posts. I tend to trust Patrick and don't see any reason to be screaming "scammer" all over his thread.
I think the link at the top of the forum pointing out scams is warning enough. I dont have anything invested with any of them. But my point is specifically to micon, I could do the same thing, repeat myself in each thread all over the site. And for example your replys joel are not personal attacks, they are well thought out replies with questions that would (if answered) expand our knowledge of an issue. This is the the case for his replies, most are personal attacks on the person, and with a tag line, see I predicted it it was a ponzi! Nanananana Toldja so toldja so. Well I think its childish.
I do think he has made his case. And the horse is very very thoroughly dead. It in no way can help the community when a new person comes to the forums and every thread that mentions prominant characters on the forum suddenly gets a response explaining how that person is scamming.....its like cyber bullying/stalking. I don't agree with his tactics. Make your case and hope people listen. The I told you so mentality has just gotten old.
Again, I completely disagree. I think it's a massive help to to community if scams and bad investments are met with consistent and vocal opposition from as many people as possible. And I don't agree about the "I told you so" mentality. That's what it takes to get people to listen next time. If the problem was already solved, you'd have a point. But it unfortunately absolutely is not.
I respect what Micon is trying to do and I do know that he means what he says. But I think he is wrong on this one.
There are a couple different views you could have about this situation
1. Patrick was running a ponzi that is collapsing
2. Patrick is no longer solvent because his debtors have defaulted (and is suffering a bank run)
3. Patrick is solvent but is suffering a bank run
I highly doubt that case 1 is true... Why send out (large) partial repayments this far into the "bank run"?
Time will tell whether 2 or 3 is the case, but I suspect that all of the principle will be returned.
There are a couple different views you could have about this situation
1. Patrick was running a ponzi that is collapsing
2. Patrick is no longer solvent because his debtors have defaulted (and is suffering a bank run)
3. Patrick is solvent but is suffering a bank run
I highly doubt that case 1 is true... Why send out (large) partial repayments this far into the "bank run"?
Time will tell whether 2 or 3 is the case, but I suspect that all of the principle will be returned.
If case 3 is true, then Patrick is lying. Which of course I don't think is the case.
It's no. 2 (going by what he has said).
I respect what Micon is trying to do and I do know that he means what he says. But I think he is wrong on this one.
There are a couple different views you could have about this situation
1. Patrick was running a ponzi that is collapsing
2. Patrick is no longer solvent because his debtors have defaulted (and is suffering a bank run)
3. Patrick is solvent but is suffering a bank run
I highly doubt that case 1 is true... Why send out (large) partial repayments this far into the "bank run"?
Time will tell whether 2 or 3 is the case, but I suspect that all of the principle will be returned.
There are a couple different views you could have about this situation
1. Patrick was running a ponzi that is collapsing
2. Patrick is no longer solvent because his debtors have defaulted (and is suffering a bank run)
3. Patrick is solvent but is suffering a bank run
I highly doubt that case 1 is true... Why send out (large) partial repayments this far into the "bank run"?
Time will tell whether 2 or 3 is the case, but I suspect that all of the principle will be returned.
Haven't read much of the thread. . . Has the grown man who is a fan of children's TV shows and who rates every scam AAA+++ wound down his own investment program scam yet?
Give Patrick some credit. Representing himself as SpongeBob's idiot friend shows a remarkable level of self awareness and honesty.
It in no way can help the community when a new person comes to the forums and every thread that mentions prominant characters on the forum suddenly gets a response explaining how that person is scamming
I think it helps quite a bit. For one thing, it means that there are some honest people remaining.
Haven't read much of the thread. . . Has the grown man who is a fan of children's TV shows and who rates every scam AAA+++ wound down his own investment program scam yet?
Maybe it's the booze, but his latest posts seem to grant that some skullduggery occured (but the fault of someone else, of course). But he's holding fast! There has been some purging of records, too. A nice touch -- very Arthur Andersen.
Strangely, his wife has disappeared. A shame really. I do love me a good shillin' 4 times a day.
100% wrong. He is one of the scammers, running a similar high interest borrowing scam just like the others.
Survived the crisis? 100% wrong: he owes withdraw obligations he cannot meet (because it's a standard scam, and remember I'm batting 1000% with labeling these as such) HINT: he's never going to meet them, start the process of the long stall for this scam too.
BrightAnarchist - you quote the evidence, but can you make any statement about the OP edits, deleting the month-over-month fiscal data? (data which I believe are total fabrications, mind you) still just blind faith with no reasoning?
I expect a full apology when this scam goes like the others I have predicted before they failed.
If you didn't believe the data, what does the deletion of it change?Survived the crisis? 100% wrong: he owes withdraw obligations he cannot meet (because it's a standard scam, and remember I'm batting 1000% with labeling these as such) HINT: he's never going to meet them, start the process of the long stall for this scam too.
BrightAnarchist - you quote the evidence, but can you make any statement about the OP edits, deleting the month-over-month fiscal data? (data which I believe are total fabrications, mind you) still just blind faith with no reasoning?
I expect a full apology when this scam goes like the others I have predicted before they failed.
Hey we get it already, you think he runs a scam. WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT, I am not even defending patrick right now. Just stfu and gtfo already, you have heard the phrase before saying, "Winning a argument on the internet is like being the smartest retard." Congratulations, you have won this argument already, now stfu.
If you think he is correct, why is he the one you're asking to shut up?I'm not in full agreement with him about Patrick and his last post changed my view a bit. Why isn't he entitled to make his case?
I do think he has made his case. And the horse is very very thoroughly dead. It in no way can help the community when a new person comes to the forums and every thread that mentions prominant characters on the forum suddenly gets a response explaining how that person is scamming.....its like cyber bullying/stalking. I don't agree with his tactics. Make your case and hope people listen. The I told you so mentality has just gotten old.
Haven't read much of the thread. . . Has the grown man who is a fan of children's TV shows and who rates every scam AAA+++ wound down his own investment program scam yet?
If you didn't believe the data, what does the deletion of it change?
It shows that the person who posted it doesn't want to be committed to it, suggesting that it was falsified.Didn't, as in did not - past tense.
Quote
Your logic must be beyond my comprehension.
I'll let you work out what the consequences of that are.Luckily, I was just being sarcastic.
100% wrong. He is one of the scammers, running a similar high interest borrowing scam just like the others.
Survived the crisis? 100% wrong: he owes withdraw obligations he cannot meet (because it's a standard scam, and remember I'm batting 1000% with labeling these as such) HINT: he's never going to meet them, start the process of the long stall for this scam too.
BrightAnarchist - you quote the evidence, but can you make any statement about the OP edits, deleting the month-over-month fiscal data? (data which I believe are total fabrications, mind you) still just blind faith with no reasoning?
I expect a full apology when this scam goes like the others I have predicted before they failed.
If you didn't believe the data, what does the deletion of it change?Survived the crisis? 100% wrong: he owes withdraw obligations he cannot meet (because it's a standard scam, and remember I'm batting 1000% with labeling these as such) HINT: he's never going to meet them, start the process of the long stall for this scam too.
BrightAnarchist - you quote the evidence, but can you make any statement about the OP edits, deleting the month-over-month fiscal data? (data which I believe are total fabrications, mind you) still just blind faith with no reasoning?
I expect a full apology when this scam goes like the others I have predicted before they failed.
Hey we get it already, you think he runs a scam. WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT, I am not even defending patrick right now. Just stfu and gtfo already, you have heard the phrase before saying, "Winning a argument on the internet is like being the smartest retard." Congratulations, you have won this argument already, now stfu.
If you think he is correct, why is he the one you're asking to shut up?I'm not in full agreement with him about Patrick and his last post changed my view a bit. Why isn't he entitled to make his case?
Jump to: