Everything about your post is messed up. But I will try to explain-
[1] You are assuming they still had the BTC at time of fork and got BCH. What if they borrowed BTC to pay for urgent dental work for their grandmother with the intention of buying back BTC from her next government check to pay back the loan? With the demands from Lone Shark, they would now need to pay back more than agreed. Not fair and may not even be possible for grandmother.
[2] Lone Shark has NOT 'waived bitcoin cash repayments' which he had no ability to waive anyway. He did not state in his post that no BCH was due. He simply gave borrowers the option to repay BCH. Very different things.

Please keep borrowing from Lone Shark as you see fit. That is your rightful choice. And please comment in this thread as you wish, but please try to first get a full understanding of what is being discussed.

Some times sleep takes priority.
Lone Shark I am not a borrower. I got concerned about fellow forum members who are borrowers of yours. You do not operate in a silo here. You do not pay theymos commission on your lending business profits. What you do on this forum is open for all to comment and have a say. We are a community. Some of us take an interest when we feel others are being taken advantage of and stand up and have a say.

I do not know Joel. I am not Joel. But Joel has understood the issues I was addressing correctly. I see he took over where I left in trying to get the point across.
Thank you Joel.

Lone Shark, please re-read your post again and decide whether you gave your customers an option. Whether your change of terms were fair. Whether a debtor would have felt comfortable in speaking up against you if they disagreed with you. Your post was a poorly disguised threat to pay up with no real options. Just because you made the 1st line of the post large and in red didn't instil absolute authority in you.



Lone Shark, you went from the above position, to the following after I raised these issues-


I did not make this thread in Scam Accusations, it was moved here by moderators.
I made this thread in Lending. The issues I raised were lending issues and I believe that is where this thread should still be. I have PM'd Cyrus requesting
"I would like the thread reinstated to Lending because it deals with the issue of lenders trying to charge borrowers both BTC and BCH in repayment of their BTC loans.

The thread covers lending issues and is not a scam accusation. I will change the thread title to make it more lending specific if you prefer.

This discussion needs to be had in the lending section as it applies to numerous situations."

It is up to Cyrus and moderators where this thread sits.

Lone Shark you must have accepted the points that have been made were fair, hence your change in position. And even if no borrower of yours had a problem with what you demanded, the raising of this issue was still valid and may help the next guy down the road. We all want this to be a fair community where members feel comfortable. Surely you can agree that too much crap goes on and people take advantage of others all the time. I do not know you and I am not trying to harm you. I am trying to protect this community.

Peace. May the Bitcoin serve you well.



p.s. Please remove the negative trust. It is unwarranted.

I got upset when i read one of your borrowers post on your loan thread wanting to clarify that they now owed you both coins.
I feel you had no right to make the demands you did and that you made them in such a manner as to make them feel they had no choice in the matter. My interpretation entirely but that is how i interpreted your posts.
I spoke up to make these points so borrowers know they have support should they feel they want to speak up.
I feel i am attempting to make this community better by having this discussed.
I don't feel i deserve negative trust because of anything I've written here. Thank you for that little bit of trust abuse. Kind of reinforces my point about you don't you think.

You are not wrong.
I am pro-choice. If someone makes an agreement than that is their choice. That is what they are responsible for. There is perceived higher risk for lenders here and they can charge what they perceive compensates. What really made me go wtf is when i read in Lone Sharks thread someone wanting to clarify that they now owed him BTC plus Bitcoin Cash like they had no say in the matter. I wanted to make a few points so they felt comfortable in speaking up if they disagreed with his demands.

Again perfectly worded. Someone that sees the bigger picture from a fair perspective.

I am letting borrowers know they need not worry about your demands and extortion attempts and that they'll be supported.
This is a community and we collectively decide what is fair and right. You are neither.

Perfectly worded.

Adding Lone Shark response in other thread here for completeness-

Lone Shark my response is simple, you lent your BTC out under an agreement. Those BTC are the borrowers. You cant change the agreement as you see fit. You gave your borrowers an option to repay early and receive an interest discount. That was fine. It is up to your borrowers to take up that option on their choice, NOT YOURS. If they do not choose that option, you don't have a Fuking leg to stand on and demand they pay you both coins.

And you are WRONG about the fork. You have no idea what you're talking about.

What is it with this guy Lone Shark who has told his customers they also now owe him BCH as well as BTC even though that was never in the original agreement. What if customers refuse? Do they deserve to get collaterals sold or negative feedback. No way. This latest fork of the BTC protocol has no impact on loan agreements for BTC here.

He is was banned and banned for good reason. Do not allow him to extort anything from you other than original agreement. No matter what notice was given. That is just bullshit.

Below is what i wrote in his loan thread -
Lone Shark as you are banned you are now ban evading by creating this alt account. Do you have theymos' permission to post again?

Just because you gave people notice that you will change the terms of their agreements with you doesn't make those changes valid. Who the fuk do you think you are.

BTC did not split, there is now just an altcoin. There are hundreds of altcoins from the BTC protocol. You have no rights to any of them from your customers. Not a single extra Satoshi and defintely no rights to BCH, unless you specified that in your original agreement. Which you did not.

People, don't let these lenders getaway with such bullshit. They lent you BTC and that is all you should repay them as agreed originally.

You cheeky bastard. Take your massive high interest and good riddance to trash like you.

Yes it was from a pump group but it was going to be based on the release of some news. That hasn't happened.
Watching the buy support levels as any increase there will indicate people are setting up ready to buy up.

I guess its a wait and see how the next 12 hours unfolds in that case. As i can't seem to find anything about a pending news release.
BTS closely follows BTC, and i think with BCC gaining support there will be a last minute rush to buy BTC in order to get the free BCC (similar to what happens with Byteball each airdrop).
This will see a spike in BTC and in turn a spike in BTS. So there will be an increase from that, but i don't think that's what was meant when talk of 3x due to news.
Watching.

Anyone know anything about major news on BTS today?
Hearing word that news coming will pump price 3x next 24 hours. Any truth in this?

You're a Legendary and this is what you write without properly explaining or mentioning value - disgusting times we live in.
You are just a speculator plain and simple, and BTC would be much better off without idiots like you.

Well someone managed to do it - currently at $1900.

Careful what you predict, just makes you look the fool when you're wrong.

@1Referee - I liked your response and give you credit for having the ability to think bigger picture.

But my thinking was more towards how @deisik has explained it. That when everything is in the red - a commodity that is a good store of value should be able to withstand the bloodshed. So when you said it has only dropped 10%, which is nothing compared to how much it has risen, my opinion was that the previous price rises were besides the point - a 10% drop was not a good indication of a good store of value- even more so since it is down 26% from last months ATH.

@deisik - best post I've read on BCTalk for ages.

Remember, the apparent use of bitcoin is as a store of value. The case of it being a currency has long gone.
Not much of a store of value if it drops 10% in 1 day. Thats HUGE - definitely not peanuts.

Did you say 'making' a loss or 'made' a loss - you're not still in at this point are you? Things will drop much further.

How will you know when it is at its lowest?

Don't put up with the BS. Any untarnished hero account or higher willing to do the escrow should be fine.
For what it is worth - an $80 deal with you should not have required an escrow.

Sometimes you just have to walk away from a deal due to bs from the other party. There is always someone else out there to deal with.

None of my business really, but how ridiculous that the other party refused ranochigo because 'he did not have an active enough ANN thread'. Unless it is a very large value deal, that there are only one or 2 users here worthy of escrowing (a la OgNasty), the escrow account just needs to be valued more than the deal value. In this case, ranochigo account is worth WAY MORE than $80 and should be perfectly acceptable to anyone truly wanting to do a deal. Otherwise they are just wasting your time. (No-one will tarnish such a good account to screw over a deal when they could just sell their account for more than the deal value).