|
On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money.
1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken.
2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything.
3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't.
4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity.
Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity.
|
On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity.
I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing.
He put $200 000 of his own money after all.
So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails.
Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good.
I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective.
People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons.
I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others.
Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho.
|
This is about the biggest non issue being made into something it's not that I've seen in awhile. Having an issue with flash on this just highlights yourself being as gullible and ignorant as the people that got taken advantage of.
Predatory practices should be condoned, but at the end of the day in this instance the only thing flash is guilty of is being a scapegoat to mask the blame people aren't willing to accept themselves.
|
On July 31 2024 20:58 Agh wrote:
This is about the biggest non issue being made into something it's not that I've seen in awhile. Having an issue with flash on this just highlights yourself being as gullible and ignorant as the people that got taken advantage of.
Predatory practices should be condoned, but at the end of the day in this instance the only thing flash is guilty of is being a scapegoat to mask the blame people aren't willing to accept themselves.
if you learn the whole incident, he played bit bigger role than that, but the biggest contributor to this is that he betrayed his base audience's expectations: which was squeaky clean Mr.StarCraft he built and cultivated to be over past 2 decades.
again, watch the video I wrote script for here (no, I am not gaining anything monetary from this). I wrote this and translated this just so that people know about this incident more in detail
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On July 31 2024 16:53 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity. I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing. He put $200 000 of his own money after all. So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails. Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good. I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective. People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons. I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others. Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho.
Knew what exactly? Despite all those who are rocking pitchforks about this, there is NOBODY who claims he owned the coin company nor knew about it being a scam coin. So your claim that he "knew exactly what he was doing" is either BS or you have info you haven't shared here. Beyond all of that it makes no difference if his investment was backed or not, he was a celebrity marketing tool, how he chose to be paid makes zero difference.
There is no legal debate for numerous reasons. Firstly because meme coins are mostly unregulated and insider trading would have nothing to do with it. Also even in a weird correlation where you'd consider it insider trading, nobody has claimed he had any info that would be deemed insider. And nobody considers insider trading a good thing except those taking advantage of it at the cost of others, there is literally no loser who thinks their stock's value being manipulated is a good thing. I'm not sure why you'd need a lawyer to explain it to you considering there is no issue.
As for investing emotionally. You're more than welcome to invest in that run down house you love or that broken down car or that NFT or whatever you want. But you are the only one to blame when that goes wrong. And if the person who directly sold/owned the item before you hid information about it you can blame them. But you don't get to randomly assign blame to someone who was a marketing ploy or paid actor.
|
On August 01 2024 06:01 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2024 16:53 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity. I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing. He put $200 000 of his own money after all. So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails. Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good. I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective. People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons. I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others. Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho. Knew what exactly? Despite all those who are rocking pitchforks about this, there is NOBODY who claims he owned the coin company nor knew about it being a scam coin. So your claim that he "knew exactly what he was doing" is either BS or you have info you haven't shared here. Beyond all of that it makes no difference if his investment was backed or not, he was a celebrity marketing tool, how he chose to be paid makes zero difference. There is no legal debate for numerous reasons. Firstly because meme coins are mostly unregulated and insider trading would have nothing to do with it. Also even in a weird correlation where you'd consider it insider trading, nobody has claimed he had any info that would be deemed insider. And nobody considers insider trading a good thing except those taking advantage of it at the cost of others, there is literally no loser who thinks their stock's value being manipulated is a good thing. I'm not sure why you'd need a lawyer to explain it to you considering there is no issue. As for investing emotionally. You're more than welcome to invest in that run down house you love or that broken down car or that NFT or whatever you want. But you are the only one to blame when that goes wrong. And if the person who directly sold/owned the item before you hid information about it you can blame them. But you don't get to randomly assign blame to someone who was a marketing ploy or paid actor.
He BOUGHT in the coin for $200K of his own money. That's not simply "paid to promote it".
Exactly what you said IS the legal debate. How much regulation should there be.
I too was surprised when I looked up this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading
"Some economists, such as Henry Manne, argued that insider trading should be allowed and could, in fact, benefit markets."
By the way I WOULD blame a paid actor if they are trying to sell me something they know is shit. Or even if they didn't do basic research on a harmful product, or did but still chose to take the money anyway. Especially if it's just a matter of greed and not survival. But this is a whole another topic...
|
On July 31 2024 20:58 Agh wrote:
This is about the biggest non issue being made into something it's not that I've seen in awhile. Having an issue with flash on this just highlights yourself being as gullible and ignorant as the people that got taken advantage of.
Predatory practices should be condoned, but at the end of the day in this instance the only thing flash is guilty of is being a scapegoat to mask the blame people aren't willing to accept themselves.
Nice victim-blaming/gaslighting going on here. Obviously Flash was in the wrong doing what he did and he should've known better, but apparently didn't really care for his fans.
I'm just saying as it is, I know I should probably not follow his games, but I can't help but do so since he's such an anomaly and I find Artosis's casts of his progression on the ladder the most entertaining StarCraft content for me there is at the moment, so yeah, I'm a selfish biggot here and not proud of it.
|
On July 24 2024 05:22 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2024 03:40 JoinTheRain wrote:
If rapists like Bryant and Ronaldo are still widely popular, I don't see flash waning in popularity if he streams. I feel nothing but contempt for him and I wouldn't watch his stream. All in all, for my personal enjoyment it is rather irrelevant if bw has flash or not. I haven't been missing him at all for the two years he was gone. Not shot you bringing Kobe and Ronaldo into this. Rip kobe man and Ronaldo is not guilty. Like respectfully you can f*ck yourself.
Very true
This is not a place where tainted and then exonerated people are compared to FlaSh...
They are both legends, and one is deceased.
Also, fortunately 90% of people miss FlaSh.
in Korea too.
You have now specifically desecrated 3 legends in different sports, congratulations!
So you can respectfully.... as Eon said.
|
On July 28 2024 04:52 tankgirl wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2024 05:01 Drock wrote:
Get off the pharmaceuticals, stop lying to yourself, and go for a walk. You don’t have to live this way. Your existence is not worthless and if you have accomplished nothing, that is 100% on you. Stop using others to excuse your outlook on life and start focusing on making your life better. Otherwise, your pain and anguish will continue for the rest of your life. Being angry, depressed, and miserable is a hard life with terrible results. Facing reality, bettering yourself, and changing your life is also a hard life but yields much better results. Choose your hard. Suppose I'm disabled? And suppose I can't walk? Suppose I have an inherited nerve condition I've developed since I was 12. Suppose my hands and feet dont work anymore. Suppose I'm just 22 with no job and no education. Suppose no one will hire me. Suppose I watched all my bests friends get degrees/husbands/careers, and they left me in the dust. Suppose during COVID I spent 3 years lying in a bed. Suppose for last 10 years I've watched my own mother's descent into depression, opioid use, and addiction, as chronic pain overwhelmed her while her nerves and connective tissues fall apart and failed her at age 40. Suppose I know for a fact I will live through the same fate. Suppose I am watching it happen daily. Suppose I can't hold a pen or a pencil anymore, not like I could just a few years ago. Suppose I need a wheelchair. Suppose I can barely type on a keyboard now. And yet in my mind, suppose I'm still just "a normal" 22 year old girl, with hopes and dreams... "Facing reality" .... "bettering yourself". ... " Choose your hard." ??? FUCK YOU, abelist asshole. P.S. Flash is gonna come back. The end.
I suppose you’ve been dealt a bad hand then. You might have it worse than most, but still better than some. There are many disabled people who chose to make the best of the life they’ve been given. If you continue on with your current attitude you absolutely will end up like your mother. I don’t want that for you, but it doesn’t matter what I want. It matters what you want. The reality is that life is what you make it. You can’t control what has happened to you, you can only control your response. That is the cold hard truth. Try to do something nice for someone today without expecting anything in return. It could be as simple as a smile and a compliment, creating something for a friend, or calling a friend or family member just to say you’ve been thinking about them. See how you feel after that, then keep doing it. Your hopes and dreams may seem impossible, and maybe they are, but you using what’s happened to you as an excuse to wish ill upon others will guarantee that you will be miserable for the rest of your life and your hopes and dreams are as good as dead. Remember, the Truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off. Much love, tankgirl.
|
Try to do something nice for someone today without expecting anything in return. ... Your hopes and dreams may seem impossible, and maybe they are, but you using what’s happened to you as an excuse to wish ill upon others will guarantee that you will be miserable for the rest of your life and your hopes and dreams are as good as dead.
Drock, you know, if you wrote something like "you are not bedridden, tankgirl, you are in siege mode", it wouldn't be as trollish.
Not everyone gets to be to be Ironmouse, changing your life path from "being terminally ill with no treatment" into "becoming a champion for the [looking for a cure or treatment] Foundation". People who have all reasons to be bitter aren't the best recruits for your "Truth" whatever it is. Leaving it be is the best case scenario.
P.S. I can't find forum rules - wasn't riotjune's post (#12) supposed to be in the "US Politics Mega-thread" containment chamber due to the amount of politics in it and warning-worthy outside of it?
|
On August 03 2024 03:36 Sentikoret wrote:Show nested quote +Try to do something nice for someone today without expecting anything in return. ... Your hopes and dreams may seem impossible, and maybe they are, but you using what’s happened to you as an excuse to wish ill upon others will guarantee that you will be miserable for the rest of your life and your hopes and dreams are as good as dead. Drock, you know, if you wrote something like "you are not bedridden, tankgirl, you are in siege mode", it wouldn't be as trollish. Not everyone gets to be to be Ironmouse, changing your life path from "being terminally ill with no treatment" into "becoming a champion for the [looking for a cure or treatment] Foundation". People who have all reasons to be bitter aren't the best recruits for your "Truth" whatever it is. Leaving it be is the best case scenario. P.S. I can't find forum rules - wasn't riotjune's post (#12) supposed to be in the "US Politics Mega-thread" containment chamber due to the amount of politics in it and warning-worthy outside of it?
Hey, let's not pretend that you didn't construct this whole post for the sole purpose of bringing that joke, but I wonder why you don't want to take the "credit" for it and instead shoehorn it onto the other person?!
|
Personally, I'm conflicted. I would like to see him come back. He is so legendary that it is arguably more prestigious to beat Flash in a bo5/bo7 than it is to win an ASL title.
What he did was so rotten though and is a permanent stain. It's exactly what KCM said. You're already rich and now you're scamming the very people that have supported you all this time and have made it all possible for him to even be in this position. It's so disgusting to try and convince people to make bad financial decisions.
In conclusion, I don't think he should be forgiven, but I do think that he should be allowed to come back and compete/stream with no fuss or mistreatment. (Which, I think he is already allowed to do. It's not like Afreeca banned him from streaming or competing.) If he was my friend I would never trust him again with anything.
|
On August 02 2024 18:15 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2024 06:01 NoobSkills wrote:On July 31 2024 16:53 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity. I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing. He put $200 000 of his own money after all. So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails. Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good. I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective. People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons. I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others. Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho. Knew what exactly? Despite all those who are rocking pitchforks about this, there is NOBODY who claims he owned the coin company nor knew about it being a scam coin. So your claim that he "knew exactly what he was doing" is either BS or you have info you haven't shared here. Beyond all of that it makes no difference if his investment was backed or not, he was a celebrity marketing tool, how he chose to be paid makes zero difference. There is no legal debate for numerous reasons. Firstly because meme coins are mostly unregulated and insider trading would have nothing to do with it. Also even in a weird correlation where you'd consider it insider trading, nobody has claimed he had any info that would be deemed insider. And nobody considers insider trading a good thing except those taking advantage of it at the cost of others, there is literally no loser who thinks their stock's value being manipulated is a good thing. I'm not sure why you'd need a lawyer to explain it to you considering there is no issue. As for investing emotionally. You're more than welcome to invest in that run down house you love or that broken down car or that NFT or whatever you want. But you are the only one to blame when that goes wrong. And if the person who directly sold/owned the item before you hid information about it you can blame them. But you don't get to randomly assign blame to someone who was a marketing ploy or paid actor. He BOUGHT in the coin for $200K of his own money. That's not simply "paid to promote it". Exactly what you said IS the legal debate. How much regulation should there be. I too was surprised when I looked up this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading"Some economists, such as Henry Manne, argued that insider trading should be allowed and could, in fact, benefit markets." By the way I WOULD blame a paid actor if they are trying to sell me something they know is shit. Or even if they didn't do basic research on a harmful product, or did but still chose to take the money anyway. Especially if it's just a matter of greed and not survival. But this is a whole another topic...
I'm sorry are sports stars, celebrities, esports players and alike all required to disclose their investments? Oh wait... they're not. And it doesn't matter if he invested 200k of his own money, if it was backed or not, or how he received compensation for promoting a product. You're holding to a standard that NOBODY else is being held to.
What I said is NOT the legal debate. There can be all sorts of regulations, it still wouldn't change the fact that he was not the owner of the coin company or maker. There is no legal debate in regard to flash. And there is no "insider trading" for meme coins, not to mention that what happened couldn't even be associated with insider trading unless you have info that NOBODY else has. Nobody is out there claiming he knew it was a scam or had information others didn't, not a single person.
|
On August 04 2024 02:12 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2024 18:15 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On August 01 2024 06:01 NoobSkills wrote:On July 31 2024 16:53 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity. I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing. He put $200 000 of his own money after all. So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails. Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good. I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective. People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons. I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others. Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho. Knew what exactly? Despite all those who are rocking pitchforks about this, there is NOBODY who claims he owned the coin company nor knew about it being a scam coin. So your claim that he "knew exactly what he was doing" is either BS or you have info you haven't shared here. Beyond all of that it makes no difference if his investment was backed or not, he was a celebrity marketing tool, how he chose to be paid makes zero difference. There is no legal debate for numerous reasons. Firstly because meme coins are mostly unregulated and insider trading would have nothing to do with it. Also even in a weird correlation where you'd consider it insider trading, nobody has claimed he had any info that would be deemed insider. And nobody considers insider trading a good thing except those taking advantage of it at the cost of others, there is literally no loser who thinks their stock's value being manipulated is a good thing. I'm not sure why you'd need a lawyer to explain it to you considering there is no issue. As for investing emotionally. You're more than welcome to invest in that run down house you love or that broken down car or that NFT or whatever you want. But you are the only one to blame when that goes wrong. And if the person who directly sold/owned the item before you hid information about it you can blame them. But you don't get to randomly assign blame to someone who was a marketing ploy or paid actor. He BOUGHT in the coin for $200K of his own money. That's not simply "paid to promote it". Exactly what you said IS the legal debate. How much regulation should there be. I too was surprised when I looked up this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading"Some economists, such as Henry Manne, argued that insider trading should be allowed and could, in fact, benefit markets." By the way I WOULD blame a paid actor if they are trying to sell me something they know is shit. Or even if they didn't do basic research on a harmful product, or did but still chose to take the money anyway. Especially if it's just a matter of greed and not survival. But this is a whole another topic... I'm sorry are sports stars, celebrities, esports players and alike all required to disclose their investments? Oh wait... they're not. And it doesn't matter if he invested 200k of his own money, if it was backed or not, or how he received compensation for promoting a product. You're holding to a standard that NOBODY else is being held to. What I said is NOT the legal debate. There can be all sorts of regulations, it still wouldn't change the fact that he was not the owner of the coin company or maker. There is no legal debate in regard to flash. And there is no "insider trading" for meme coins, not to mention that what happened couldn't even be associated with insider trading unless you have info that NOBODY else has. Nobody is out there claiming he knew it was a scam or had information others didn't, not a single person.
not disclosing their investment when they (were) going to promote it is shady to say the very least.
The incident blew up just before that happened but they were filming ads for it anyway so the plan was to do that.
not only that, the investment was guaranteed on their end to compensate if it doesn't work out- a 0 risk insider trading of sorts.
|
On August 04 2024 02:48 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2024 02:12 NoobSkills wrote:On August 02 2024 18:15 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On August 01 2024 06:01 NoobSkills wrote:On July 31 2024 16:53 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 31 2024 07:14 NoobSkills wrote:On July 30 2024 20:03 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On July 28 2024 03:03 NoobSkills wrote:On July 27 2024 16:24 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:
#StopTheCope
Flash did the bad. That's a fact.
No need to make up excuses for him.
He is the greatest BW player. Also a fact.
Just because he is the BW goat that does not make him a good person automatically.
You CAN like his skills AND dislike his real life choices at the same time.
To the people who just say "it was the fault of his for trusting him" I GUARANTEE you would not be saying that if it was YOU getting scammed. For example say you deposit 1000 bucks in ur bank and the next day the bank tells you "OH BRUH THAT 1000 BUCKS IS NOW ACTUALLY OUR MONEY, SHOULDA READ THE SMALL PRINT BRUH" I 1000% guarantee you would NOT accept that. You would not say "I guess I should have read the small print, it was all my fault, I am dumb therefore I do not deserve my money, the bank got me fair and square"
BTW I voted Very positive for his return.
You're right, I would be mad at the sham bank. I would be mad at the owner of the sham bank. I would also be mad at myself for not doing any research about the sham bank and foolishly putting my money in with an unstable banking institution. What I wouldn't do. Is blame someone who had a good experience at that same bank. Or the lady they hired for a commercial for their advertisement for the bank. Seeing as that lady had no idea the bank was a sham bank. Nor was it her responsibility to investigate the sham bank's shammyness. "Flash did the bad" No, no he didn't. There is a reason why there are zero legal repercussions for what happened for flash. It is because he did not in fact "do the bad". You can't even argue he has some sort of moral responsibility outside of the law because he didn't know it was going to be a scam coin. Just because something is legal or illegal does not automatically make it good or bad. For example legal executions "(Sea, flash, Guemchi and non sc streamers) to invest crypto he was planning to make called "T.ocoin". They signed agreement that their money will be secured no matter what." So apparently he would not have lost money either way (provided "good guy Suit" came through, that's the person behind the coin). ^_._^ This is very different from being paid directly to advertise a product you don't personally own AND you are hiding you actually own it without a possibility of losing money. Let's say only a few people invested in it. Then Flash pulls out his money driving the price even lower and Suit pays him the difference as per the contract. Flash lost basically nothing. While average investor lost a lot because they are not covered against a loss and they didn't know Flash had so little confidence he had to be making a Free bet essentially and in secret to risk his own money. Presumably if people knew he was making a free bet they would be less confident about their own investment. There definitely is a legal and moral debate to be had. Otherwise he would not have gone into hiding and his fans would have been happy to lose their money. 1. Correct about the law, it doesn't fully determine good/bad and sometimes encompasses crazy things that it probably shouldn't. However, it still remains that no law was broken. 2. It does not matter how he was paid or if it was guaranteed to be backed as part of his advertising for the coin, as long as he didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't an owner of the company, he was just a paid actor. You don't hold others responsible for the companies they promote, and even if you do, you shouldn't. Boycott the company, take them the court sure, but he wasn't in charge of anything. 3. There is absolutely zero legal debate to be had no matter how you feel on the subject, nor moral for that matter. If he had known or was an owner sure, you could make that argument, but he wasn't and he didn't. 4. Anyone investing in some meme coin or NFT is playing the lotto. They made their choice regardless, and unfortunately their number didn't get picked. Their get rich quick scheme failed and they probably should have diversified their investments in a normal stock market if they wanted a sure thing. Now they're looking for someone to blame and anyone to blame, when in reality it was their choice, nobody made them invest in such a risky entity. Yes, I do feel sorry some unintelligent people were taken by a scam coin creator, but blame needs to go where it belongs. And IMO it belongs with the scam coin owners and the individuals themselves who tried to scheme to riches rather than make educated decisions, instead of the list of paid actors who didn't own the entity. I think the more reasonable assumption to make is he knew exactly what he was doing. He put $200 000 of his own money after all. So that is the ammount he owned. And he was guaranteed by the creator that he gets it back if everything fails. Of course there is a legal debate in the sense of different laws around the world regarding insider trading for one. Some people even argue that insider trading is good. I would love if a korean lawyer familiar with the matter explained it all from their perspective. People invest because of their emotions not just because of rational reasons. I think its analagous of requiring helmets for bike riders. Nobody makes people ride bikes at high speeds without helmet. They do it because it feels good. But helmets are required because when a person crashes there are terrible consequences for themselves and others. Some new laws and regulations were passed after GME to ensure more informed decisions and hopefully force ppl to do their research. Its still a wild west situation in many aspects tho. Knew what exactly? Despite all those who are rocking pitchforks about this, there is NOBODY who claims he owned the coin company nor knew about it being a scam coin. So your claim that he "knew exactly what he was doing" is either BS or you have info you haven't shared here. Beyond all of that it makes no difference if his investment was backed or not, he was a celebrity marketing tool, how he chose to be paid makes zero difference. There is no legal debate for numerous reasons. Firstly because meme coins are mostly unregulated and insider trading would have nothing to do with it. Also even in a weird correlation where you'd consider it insider trading, nobody has claimed he had any info that would be deemed insider. And nobody considers insider trading a good thing except those taking advantage of it at the cost of others, there is literally no loser who thinks their stock's value being manipulated is a good thing. I'm not sure why you'd need a lawyer to explain it to you considering there is no issue. As for investing emotionally. You're more than welcome to invest in that run down house you love or that broken down car or that NFT or whatever you want. But you are the only one to blame when that goes wrong. And if the person who directly sold/owned the item before you hid information about it you can blame them. But you don't get to randomly assign blame to someone who was a marketing ploy or paid actor. He BOUGHT in the coin for $200K of his own money. That's not simply "paid to promote it". Exactly what you said IS the legal debate. How much regulation should there be. I too was surprised when I looked up this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading"Some economists, such as Henry Manne, argued that insider trading should be allowed and could, in fact, benefit markets." By the way I WOULD blame a paid actor if they are trying to sell me something they know is shit. Or even if they didn't do basic research on a harmful product, or did but still chose to take the money anyway. Especially if it's just a matter of greed and not survival. But this is a whole another topic... I'm sorry are sports stars, celebrities, esports players and alike all required to disclose their investments? Oh wait... they're not. And it doesn't matter if he invested 200k of his own money, if it was backed or not, or how he received compensation for promoting a product. You're holding to a standard that NOBODY else is being held to. What I said is NOT the legal debate. There can be all sorts of regulations, it still wouldn't change the fact that he was not the owner of the coin company or maker. There is no legal debate in regard to flash. And there is no "insider trading" for meme coins, not to mention that what happened couldn't even be associated with insider trading unless you have info that NOBODY else has. Nobody is out there claiming he knew it was a scam or had information others didn't, not a single person. not disclosing their investment when they (were) going to promote it is shady to say the very least. The incident blew up just before that happened but they were filming ads for it anyway so the plan was to do that. not only that, the investment was guaranteed on their end to compensate if it doesn't work out- a 0 risk insider trading of sorts.
I think you'd be surprised about the massive list of individuals who have stock investments, while also receiving some sort of income from promoting those products that you don't know about. Not even including general market funds that encompass the entire market.
I don't care that he was going to be on the radio, or a TV commercial, or on the corner of the street waving a sign. He was a paid actor so what? And it also doesn't matter if his payment involved the coin, or a stock share, or if those were backed by the company or another individual, or if he was paid in cash or a lifetime supply of fanta. That is his choice to accept whatever level payment he wants.
And as for insider trading, I think most people here are struggling with that concept and have NO idea what they're talking about. Nothing he did even begins to meet the threshold of insider trading, but if you give me evidence, sure I'd agree with you, but that isn't what happened, and because his coin value was 0 risk, he wouldn't need to participate in insider trading because it would make no difference to him. Inside trading would be if his coins weren't 0 risk, and he was an actual owner of the company and had some sort of information about a stock move up or down ahead of time and used that to gain a financial advantage over others. That was not the case here, not only that, but in terms of meme coin investments insider trading isn't even a thing, but in a loose way of associating it, he still doesn't meet the threshold of participating in such a thing.
Again, this is sort of why I've said people are searching for someone and everyone to blame because they can't even figure out what he did, because it certainly wasn't "insider trading". Back in the real world though where you can't just blame anything even remotely associated with what gave you troubles, the blame most likely only belongs with those who worked at the coin company and had that type of info or knew it was a scam ahead of time, and the investors themselves who didn't do any due diligence while investing. It sucks, but eventually you do have to do a minimal amount of work to not be scammed or at least use some common sense. Otherwise those Nigerian Princes that keep emailing me would be extraordinarily wealthy by now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
