This is pretty weak. He stole 0.2 bitcoin from you, but you also stole 4 bitcoin (?) from him and still haven't paid the promised investor compensation that you promised in late 2016. So the obvious thing is deduct the 0.2 BTC and pay him the rest.

I'm not trying to take sides, but AFAICT you're both scammers -- just you owe more, and write a bit more coherently.

I said this exact thing in a PM to DD today.  Scary coincidence.

The problem is you ruin every discussion with your constant odd attacks.  Every time anyone says anything you jump in with horrible writing saying the same thing over and over and it ruins any discourse.  While your original premise is good, you execute it in a very ignorant way and do a lot of damage to your side of the argument.

Regarding the red trust, I don't think it does much good to rep red as a non-DT member except for situations where people are actually buying/selling goods.  Additionally, while I did personally lose money due to the broken promise regarding the Rubies floor, I still honestly don't know exactly who is to blame.  I'm hoping that the question asked by Dooglus in the other thread regarding who actually was the one to make/break the promise that lost people so much money.  I will quote what I said to DD:


Which I think holds more power than a non-DT red rep.

I will give the mail conversation we had regarding RBIES to any trusted member

I will give PMs ( Dogedigital bombarded me with PMs ) to any trusted member to go through and get a view of his BS
even I told him he should not PM me cause all PMs are official because I will publish those if needed

a very interesting PM was where he was whining like a child ( very strange )

I had a really long write-up prepared, but deleted it.  This stuff has stressed me out quite enough already.

Going to share my quick thoughts and probably leave it be after this:

First, I am more than confident that I could explain the story to a neutral third party and have them see my side.  I am not claiming that it was the perfect way, but that it was one of the best ways to handle it given the circumstances.  I'm not looking to 'win' an argument for the sake of my ego; I'd rather put my effort into working and making the things I say come true rather than be distracted.

Second, giving an account to someone so that he can work towards paying debt off on Christmas does not equal distrust.  I didn't work with him afterwards, even though I believe if I had, that the money would go towards paying back his debt to others as well.  I can find examples of people that have posted in this thread that are well trusted that have done the same.  

Third, I'm not a fan of people actively trying to break privacy to pursue a witch hunt.  I feel the line has already been breached and don't know where it will end if things like this is continually encouraged and sought out.

I'd also like to throw some notes out:

- Moneypot and/or I did not profit from Rubies.  Moneypot and/or I did not create Rubies.  Moneypot and/or I did not have any pre-mined or originally distributed coins.
- I am NOTHING like Josh Garza.  Josh actively tried to scam and profited from people with malicious intent.  People should have something against him and it's alarming that one does not.
- We actively told people not to buy based on our actions and highly discouraged any form of trading based on our interactions in private conversations.  
- The promise was kept for about a year and we aim to bring it back if possible (most likely with a few modifications to prevent abuse/exploits).


I do believe that overall for the sake of the community and the coin, that it was the proper move to make and one that made the most sense.

I do understand that some people lost out because of it if they decided to sell already.  

I also believe that many more people benefited from our involvement than did not and that those who did not will still be able to if they haven't exited already.  

To end this, I am not perfect, but I can wholeheartedly say that I am doing everything I can to do right by the people.  I know these are just words until my actions fill them, so I'll be working hard on that.  I hope we will have an update for everyone soon.

Take care.

I'd encourage you to try. I have not as of yet seen coherent explanation that would justify your actions.


This isn't remotely true. Rubies were originally created by "betterbets". Try answer these questions:

a) What % of "pre-mined" rubies did betterbets start with
b) What % of "betterbets" does or did MP own at any time
c) Did MoneyPot make a commission on bets placed on BetterBets
d) Did BetterBets give out rubies for people betting in a way that would generate MoneyPot revenue?

If you answer these questions honestly, it is pretty obvious that you/MoneyPot directly profited by the price of rubies being higher.


Again, this is an extremely dishonest mischaracterization. The scheme wasn't abused, it was simply used. You promised a price floor, the price traded below the price floor and people sold it to you. That's not abuse, it's quite literally what the price floor buy back promise was established for.

Also I don't think you get much credit for honoring the promise when the price was trading above the price floor  


Dude. There's no future to the coin, it's literally a scam coin. You might have been able to fool people once, but it's now got such a tainted history that no one sane will touch it, and you know it.


A nice platitude, but obviously bullshit. If you truly believed it you would be buying it  and honoring the price floor you promised.

What about at the time you promised the price floor? What about later? What was the highest stake in BetterBets you owned? And likewise how much did BetterBets make from selling premined rubies?

c) Moneypot made commission on Bitcoin bets placed on BetterBets.  It made 0 commission from Rubies bets.  Many BetterBets players bet Rubies instead of Bitcoin, which adds to my #1 point from earlier.
d) I believe BetterBets gave out Rubies to profit as a coin and sell stakes in their site.  It wasn't designed to increase Bitcoin betting on Moneypot.  



BetterBets gave out rubies when people bet bitcoin, called "bet mining". MoneyPot made a commission when people bet bitcoin. The price of rubies being higher made the benefits for betting on BetterBets better, thus attracted more action and commissions for MoneyPot..

I answer as much as I can.  I'd be much more willing to answer all questions if you didn't try to find selective spots to attack in them and likewise actually answered questions that I had for you.  

Moneypot does own a % of BetterBets currently.  I am not able to disclose full details about it, but I will say we never wanted to own a %.  We didn't want BetterBets to sell any part of their site.  The MP team that bought from Ryan were told that it was very unlikely that BetterBets was going to sell.  I highly doubt (I'm not certain because I wasn't a part of it) that the MP team would have bought it if it knew that BetterBets was going to sell any part of their site or create side coins to bet with.

Moneypot never profited off of Rubies betting.  Moneypot never owned any of the Rubies income and had no part in its house bankroll at any time.

We disliked Rubies betting altogether because they'd be betting on Moneypot where Moneypot receives no commission and no part of the betting action. 

You can only really prevent someone from not taking altcoins by forcing them out.  BetterBets was by far the most active casino and was the biggest reason for acquiring Moneypot, I imagine (I wasn't a part of the original deal).  It would be foolish to kick them out at the time.  This is why it was quite upsetting learning of Rubies and the program in the first place.

The Rubies coins were not destroyed.  Only coins that were destroyed are ones that were converted into R2B2.

I admit some decisions made were mistakes.  Some of them were forced out of consequence.  But none of them were scams or intended to hurt anyone.  That's why I've been quite emotional in some of these posts.
They were all meant to help Moneypot and all its users for the long term in some way. 

Before joining the Moneypot team, I saw a grand vision of what Moneypot could become.  It's why I had sacrificed quite a bit of time, energy, stress, and finances to try and get it there. 

The ICO partnership would have gone a long way to help make those dreams came true until we were under fire and threats.  Now, being powered by MonsterByte, Moneypot has another great chance at getting us there.  It won't be immediate, but I believe it will definitely get there.  And once it does, people will see why things were done the way it was.