Quote from: bigbeninlondon on September 23, 2013, 11:36:06 AM

Quote from: nebiz on September 23, 2013, 11:33:23 AM

Quote from: bigbeninlondon on September 23, 2013, 09:50:44 AM

I think the spreadsheet that I've posted contains all the pertinent information. I understand that bitcoin was the measurement, and not chips (although why that was is beyond me; it's a lot easier to split bitcoin than chips). This is why my sheet contains rounded information as well, since we couldn't feasibly split chips. I can fancy it up and add exact btc amounts as well, to make sure everything adds up.

It should be identical for original payors. The payments were all odd values due to fees, overpayments, etc. People who paid in bitcoins should get refunded the amount they paid in. People who bought bitcoins should get refunded the value of the bitcoins in terms of the original value, less JohnK's escrow fee and the 1% removed for raginazn for the ORIGINAL orderer, which the buyer will then get a fraction of. That's where you will find the tricky algebra.

Can do. However, should raging get his original 1%? He fucking bounced. I vote he gets jack shit. John K deserves his cut, but raging just kind of left us holding the bag here.

I vote we get 100% what we put in by subtracting funds from ragingazn's chip orders, in addition, I think he should pay for the people who took over and made spreadsheets (of course I did the refund vote so I'm a little biased, then again I did it for free.) At lease have him pay to refund the original price since he has at least 17 btc in chips.