Also, in another thread someone argued that we can't really be sure if every PPT forwarded all coins to Pirate, or used some/all for their own investment plans.
I'm not saying payb.tc did, but that argument has been going around in my head since then because it would open up another can of worms.
I don't see where this argument goes though. If you pay someone to do something knowing that they have no way to prove whether they did it or not, how can you later complain that they can't prove they did it? And why would it matter anyway since the consequences are the same -- the money is lost -- either way?
What if the PPT decided to invest the coins somewhere else? Most investors left their interest in the PPT.
Now that Pirate defaulted a malicious PPT could keep the coins, knowing that Pirate will be blamed for the loss, and get away relatively easy.
It's easy in hindsight, everyone's an expert on Pirate and Ponzi schemes. But in the thick of it 6 months ago, PPT operators would have taken a huge risk to do what you're suggesting, because if Pirate turned out be legit and returned all the coins, then PPT operators had better make sure they can come up with 7% per week somewhere else otherwise they'd get 100% of the blame not just some of it.