Quote from: Boussac on September 18, 2013, 07:00:34 AM

...
Anyway if your alleged "friend" waited for so long to wonder about his/her iw balance, it must be insignifiant to him/her or else he/she was using iw for long term storage of a signifiant amount, a purpose iw was never intended for.
I am afraid the best things have to come to an end, even this claim process.

I was clear in logic (if not in documentation once Bitcoin-Central got a hold of it) that Instawallet was not a satisfactory solution for 'long terms storage of signifiant[sic] amount', but that was more due to the 'significant amount' aspect of things. The solution was never marketed as anything but an ideal solution for long term storage of insignificant amounts, and I have no trouble imagining many people with limited attention doing so. In fact, certain development efforts revolved around creating Instawallet account and funding them on the behalf of others.

Is Bitcoin-Central going to publish their 'take' when all of the not-claimed accounts are swept up and appropriated?

For the record, I think that such a windfall is appropriate and should accrue to Bitcoin-Central. And further that it is appropriate to set a time limit since it is clear that the loss for those who were not interested enough to check up on things in some number of quarters would be minimal to them in a relative way. But I also would appreciated full disclosure of the books once the loose ends are tied up. Mostly because it would help understand whether Bitcoin-Central is harmless (and thus somewhat trustworthy), or whether they are the perpetrators of this crime, acting in concert with the perps, or are generaly exploiting a crime that they were otherwise not a part of.

Edit: modest fixes.