Quote from: Noitev on September 26, 2013, 08:21:44 AM

Quote from: nebiz on September 26, 2013, 08:05:02 AM

Quote from: Vycid on September 26, 2013, 12:42:50 AM

Quote from: bigbeninlondon on September 25, 2013, 11:35:00 PM

And where did you receive permission from the majority of the group buy to give said chips to prodigits7?

That was a decision YOU made, WITHOUT our consent. You said "I need them for my assembly". Then you gave them away, and didn't use them for the purpose you stated you were going to use them. How do you think you are absolved of that responsibility by giving them to someone NONE of us have ever heard of?

I believe we should deduct 30 chips from your total and redistribute it proportionally to each chip owner, and the onus should rest on you to recover them and sell them for whatever you can get for them.

How is this not fair?

I agree that those chips were group property, and raging does not deny that he appropriated them. Payment for those chips seems very reasonable, especially given how timely they were.

I hate to defend anyone in this thread because you are all a bunch of wolves out looking for something to take a bite out of.

In fact, I was going to defend someone, but I am not going to after that sentence. Get over it. You know the math, you know JohnK doesn't care what you say, he'll refund the escrow per the original terms.

Stop wasting your time, people.

What exactly is the problem here? he stole 32 chips from us, if you just deduct it from his share and add it to the pot, then everyone (including raging) gets a discount equivalent their stake in the sample chips.

Can we drop the polarizing language? We don't need to say raging stole the chips. We don't know that. What we know is that raging was responsible for the loss of 32 chips of group property.

I hate to even bother with such a trifling sum of money, especially since emotions are clearly so high, but I do think that raging should be financially responsible for those chips. If he had distributed them with the group's permission he would not be.

Raging: please understand that we didn't trust prodigits7. You did. And you unilaterally (and against the group's wishes) acted to give the chips to him. You alone are responsible for their loss, and therefore for remunerating their fair value to the group.

(Proof that the group wanted the chips to go to BKKCoins: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=177994.1060)