60k "Staking" dispute

[pizarro1]

So you're saying even though you were already playing under the stake/loan agreement, you would eat the loss of 15k yourself? That doesn't make sense.

[Prevaricator]

the way i see it, you loaned boosted 30k.

then the next day boosted asked to be staked and you sent another 30k, the staking deal is including makeup and is an even split 50% 50% between staker and the horse.

so why does the original 30k loan get morphed into staking losses. basically that is like paying him $30k for the privelege of being able to stake him. I don't think that's right.

edit: read the rest of the thread, i guess its 15k as other posters have noted, since that is what he lost before the decision was made to be staked.

[Butcho22]

Can we PLEASE get a comment from Boosted on why he would lie about the time difference in the $$ transfers between him and OP?

[Butcho22]

[ QUOTE ]
Can we PLEASE get a comment from Boosted on why he would lie about the time difference in the $$ transfers between him and OP?

[/ QUOTE ]

[john voight]

wow, I read first couple hundred posts and have this to say:
Both parties were unresponsible when making the deal.
Through Boosted's terms, I say, boosted owes Phillip $0
Through Phillip's terms, I say, boosted owes the initial stake.

The question is simply; how do you read it. I feel the agreement was unclear, and so there is no true way to read it; thus, I am affriad Phil has a case for wanting the 100% return, however dues to the poor contract, he cannot get it.

BoostedJ: i suggest you repay some % as severance, after all, it is your fault you were not clear (just like phil's) and not repaying is really unfair.

Second comment: lol @ the guy who grew up in the ghetto, and was trying to prove to a 19 year old kid how tough he is. He guy, in your eyes you may seem really cool, but IRL you look like a clown.

Congrats on fitting in w/ a bunch of non-white thugs. That is quite an achievement.

[Roman]

I must say this is the most entertaining thread in HSNL in the longest time

[Prevaricator]

ok, after reading more of the thread, i guess it makes a difference if boosted lost the 60k when he was on the stake or if he started with less than the 60, and then converted losses incurred during the period before the stake into makeup. It just seems wierd to me that he would have to ask for more money in order to be staked if he did have the 30k on hand.

[pizarro1]

So he could have a freeroll on nosebleed stakes.

[apefish]

[ QUOTE ]
foobar,

"I'm surprised no one else mentioned this, but it seems particularly bad that bj turned the loan into a stake AFTER losing some of it."

Outstanding point.

Boosted, I think even you would have to admit that had you won money, you NEVER would have retroactively said to him "Hey, rememeber that 30k that you loaned me? Let's call that a stake instead and I'll pay you a share of the profits in addition to paying you back."

There is simply ZERO value in him agreeing to convert a 15k loan that you have ALREADY LOST into staking dollars.

If you have any integrity at all, I'd think at the very least you should send him back the 15k that you had ALREADY LOST out of the first 30k he loaned you.

That would leave him with 45k in makeup that you can either choose to honor as makeup or try to reach a compromise with him by settling for some amount to wipe out that obligation and debt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to derail, but I wrote earlier that I thought Boosted didnt have a leg to stand on if the first 30K wasn't already still sitting in his account, and that even if it was there was no way he retroactively sent Filth any profits on it as a converted stake to start over from zero.
He converted it because it's a better deal for him only. The fact that this point is being debated this late in the thread shows how poorly this was thought thru by Boosted and/or OP.
There are so many glaring holes in how this whole thing happened that I still cannot believe someone can insist that his reputation is important to him and yet ignore the reality of how it happened/now looks.
You don't protect reputations by insisting you were right all along when that is far from clear.

[Christophers]

This thread makes me glad I've never bothered staking anyone ever.

Boosted: you're shady.