Quote from: Plazmotech on June 21, 2013, 08:06:20 PM

Quote from: ThatDGuy on June 21, 2013, 08:03:24 PM

Quote from: crumbs on June 21, 2013, 08:02:51 PM

Quote from: Plazmotech on June 21, 2013, 07:57:56 PM

[...]
What's morally wrong of Garr's actions is the decision to keep this price manipulator anonymous. Had he revealed the existence and admitted to the use of the account before beginning the "auction", his actions would be completely free of any moral fault.

In other words, if he shilled from his own account (why bother with establishing an alt if everyone knows it's you?), everything would be fine, yeah. Lulzy, 'coz no one would be stupid enough to think of the charade as an auction, but ethically wrong? No.

+1

Who would participate in such a farce?

I would. He's selling his stuff, why shouldn't he have control over the price of the sell? Hell, if he wanted to he could sell it for a fixed price of BTC100, but he didn't, instead, used the "auction" as a tool to gauge the demand of his audience, then placed a price point.

Why do you suppose people pay a premium for setting a reserve, why do you think the word "shill" has negative connotations, and why, ffs, would Garr try to hide his actions behind a sock account if they're reasonable, expected, and justified???

Edit: Posted before i saw your reply.
/all good