Quote from: kingcrimson on January 13, 2015, 10:06:46 PM

It is always the exact same story with EV, blame everyone but himself. I cringe every time he presents himself as a figurehead for bitcoin considering his trademark lack of character and selfishness.

Even in his little 'sorry you're screwed' message, he slips in that he accepted BTC and is sorry he can't payback the USD. BTC should payback bitcoin, you psychopath.

Calm down kingcrimson. I'm absolutely to blame for the failure of FZB, and for the poor communication after it fell apart.

Now, "BTC should payback bitcoin," you say. First, investors don't get "paid back" when a business fails. I didn't take on debt from the investors with an interest rate and repayment terms. I took on investment in return for shares of equity. Second, it's absurd to say "BTC should payback bitcoin" unless there is some specific clause in an agreement specifying such. When you invest or contribute property to something, there is a value of that transaction, called consideration. It would be same if you used dollars or gold or wheat. This concept is not new, and whenever business deals are done, the value of the consideration provided is how restitution or damages are calculated.

You will not find a single example in business case law where a debtor (and this wasn't even a debt situation, as described above) was required to pay back "in kind" instead of based on the value of the consideration, unless an explicit clause in some agreement stipulated that was to be done.

And something tells me that if the bitcoin price had fallen, and Bitcoin was $0.01 each now, that if I paid back the bitcoins to the investors, you would be here railing on me for not paying back the "real value", the USD value, of the investment.