Quote from: User705 on December 04, 2013, 06:19:48 PM

Quote from: sangaman on December 04, 2013, 03:50:38 PM

Quote from: Atruk on December 04, 2013, 01:59:13 AM

On the other hand the BitBet operators are strictly following contracts between themselves, shareholders, and bettors.

The action that creates a valid Bitcoin transaction is called a signature for a reason. In this case snackman signed a transaction to a recipient who had already GPG signed a contract with shareholders describing exactly how this situation would be handled.

As has already been said, a FAQ is not a contract and users should not have to read an entire FAQ to make sure they don't get swindled by gotchas. FAQs are for when people have questions (which are frequently asked), not mandatory reading. A terms and conditions that are presented or clearly linked to on each bet page would be a different story. Better yet would be an actual contract. Snackman signed a transaction, not a contract. And even then, contracts don't make swindling acceptable.

Also I don't understand why the recipient (bitbet in this case) signing a contract with shareholders has anything to do with how they handle customers. They still have an obligation to treat customers honestly and fairly. If part of their deal with shareholders was that they would accept user deposits and then one day close down and run away with those deposits, it wouldn't excuse that behavior.

I get that bitcoin is caveat emptor, and one could fault snackman for not being careful about vetting BitBet and going over their policies with a fine-tooth comb before he sent them money. That doesn't make what BitBet did alright, and snackman is now doing the right thing by warning others about BitBet's unscrupulous practices. Personally, I like to see people get their wealth through voluntary trade and ethical behavior, and there's nothing ethical or voluntary about advertising a betting service and then confiscating a bet without delivering any service simply because of a cockeyed policy buried in a FAQ.

If an FAQ isn't a contract then what is it when no contract is present? And if no contract existed why would anyone be obligated to do anything? Contracts in bitcoin are useless because there's no 3rd party authority that can ever enforce it. Snackman basically called a bookie and said I want to bet. Bookie said ok but make sure you get me the money BEFORE the game starts. He said ok. Nothing happened. Sometime next day the money showed up. Huh

Now he can ask for anything he wants but bitbet doesn't owe him anything.

A FAQ maybe?