I have read the whole thread and this is my opinion on this:
goose20 defense is based on the fact that he is entitled to default the loan because BTC has increased in value from the time that he had taken the loan:
...
You state You are talking about things (BTC skyrocketing) that were not in the original agreement. This has no bearing on the loan repayment. Well of course it does. BTC went up 10x 20x so I could no longer afford the payments that definitely has a bearing.
...
This position has no real world backup.
The fact is that goose20 took the loan in BTC and now is in default. A few years ago, the banks were giving loans in Swiss Francs for everything ranging from personal loans to mortgage loans (you can search on the web to see in which country). In the meantime, the Swiss Franc had increased in value so the rate payments had become extremely large in the national currency compared to when the loan was granted. People had complained to the government, and all the government could do in order to help was to talk with the banks to grant some extensions and this was it. Many people had lost their houses and are still in debt.
In conclusion, my point of view is that goose20 defense it's just an absurder excuse in order to default the loan: in his own words, it says that the increase of BTC value has a bearing on the loan repayment, when in fact it doesn't.
zazarb is entitled to the loan repayment as agreed in the original terms, if the loan was in BTC, then he is entitled to receive the payment in BTC also, if it doesn't specify otherwise in the original terms.
I really think that goose20 wasn't trying to scam, but his approach on this (with inventing excuses) doesn't show a trustworthy behaviour, so, for now, I will leave negative feedback to goose20 in order to warn others until this situation is resolved.