Callisto 5 makes good posts.

How could Fatal's action that was reserved and booked in person be in question here? Who cares when it was, if tmay is irresponsible and sells 100% of his action, he is responsible for paying the investors, not the people he accidentally overbooked with. there's no way FE did anything wrong and lol at people trying to make him feel guilty about it. It looks like people are realizing that tmay wont pay redgrape what is actually owed so now we're pointing fingers at FE?

There'd absolutely be differing opinions but, by mp standards, it seems like redgrape should ship the money back.

I think a better solution would be some compromise and redgrage ship a % back but that's just my opinion.

It seems like it's in everyone's best interest to compromise but, imo, it should all be based on the good will of redgrape. This is assuming that MP standard is that, with no other stipulations in the thread, shipped money is considered booked without confirmation.

I also think redgrape should try and disregard tmay's first response and the "sneak-attack" part of his more recent post. I certainly wouldn't blame him if he couldn't disregard it, though.

While I don't think Fatal Error's shares should really be in question, it does raise some interesting thoughts.

If we are to go along the lines of the "intentions are paramount" theory......

then even though Tmay sold 10% and confirmed it with FE in person, his "intentions" would not have been to sell that 10%, because he certainly would not have sold 10% to FE if he knew that he already had 10% sold to redgrape.

Except we aren't.

FE's share has nothing to do with me, even if he offered me some of his % I would not take it.

I am currently trying to convince tmay to do arbitration.

If redgrape gave consideration, which he did, and was confirmed, which he was based on the wording from Tmay, then why should he ever settle for anything less than 10%? If anyone who booked after redgrapes (someone like FE) did the same, why shouldn't their shares be in question as well?

Well no ones shares should be in question

Right, which is why Tmay should eat this and move on. I would never settle for less than 10% in your shoes.

but if tmay busts on day 2 then he always sends redgrapes 10% transfer back cause he came itt and said that neither had a %, so redgrape has sick freeroll (i know he didnt create this freeroll) which is why its a sticky situation.

There was no freeroll. Tmay should never ship my money back in this situation.

No one can say with 100% certainty that Tmay sends the money back. How about the fact that he didn't?! So there's one person getting freerolled here, and it's not Tmay.

IPlayHi,
Coming from someone who loves hyperbole, I would say you have a very liberal definition of the term 'sick freeroll'

my point is that no one's shares should be in question. it's obvious that action was booked and tmay was dumb and sold more than he wanted and owes investors what was booked. If tmay booked 10% with FE before the event it's booked.... and so was redgrapes. Now it looks like redgrape may get welched on (naturally), this doesnt mean FE deserves to get rolled as well. its just an unfortunate situation for redgrape that he invested in a moron, and probably won't be getting the 18k he's owed.

I agree, and I only bring up FE not getting his share, because for everyone that thinks that's ridiculous, it's just as ridiculous for redgrape to not get his. They're in the exact same situation. Suck it up Tmay.

The basic concept of how transactions should take place in the marketplace is that it minimizes or makes moot what impact hypotheticals have on resolving issues like this.

Take care of business and rainbows and unicorns don't matter.

Don't, and you're probably going to have to go away pissed at yourself.

Nobody gets a special marketplace undertitle that reads "really good guy irl"

While I apologise for being a bully, I must admit as time passes, I'm buying the fact the fact TMay is a stand up guy less and less.

Redgrape is trying to persuade him to go to arbitration? WTF?

It must so obvious to him which way arbitration would rule that TMay can't face admitting he is in the wrong.

Just pay the man his damn money before you ruin your reputation any further.

tmay did send the money back the morning of day 2 afaik. And there is no way he would have taken it back of he busted.

I think that means that 10% of his day 2 stack is the most tmay should possibly owe, otherwise redgrape would have gotten a sick freeroll.

this is pretty irrelevant because as soon as tmay sent the money back Redgrape said it was unsatisfactory to him....just because he sent the money back doesn't mean the action was off at that point.

Reputation is an idle and most false imposition; oft got without merit!

Yes of course the post was in jest (my last one not one I quoted by mistake) May's behaviour is a disgrace, the people who've referred to him as a great guy are obviously part of his clique. No "stand up guy" behaves in that fashion, it's obvious to anyone with any moral fibre. I wouldn't be so bold as to call him a reneging welsher, but, his shortcoming regarding the operation of the thread aside his subsequent posts have shown a total arrogant disregard for the MP. Sick and tired about hearing about his reputation/intentions etc. If he wasn't some kind of mtt idol he would be getting crucified.

Explain why you think sending back the money was the right course of action in this situation? Are you saying if he didn't send me the money id still be entitled to my share?

I am not saying it is the right action, I am saying it is what happened. Yes, if he kept your money and never said anything he would owe all 10%.

He sent you the money, you kept it. You could have tried to sent it back, but you kept it. At that point you were at "100% no risk."

Are you really saying that if at the time he tried to deny action, that he offered you 10% of his day 2 stack equity+ a little extra for the burden you wouldn't have accepted it? You would have rather he played for 7%, lessening his motivation, screwing him and every one of his investors?

Clearly he should have tried to deal with the situation at that time, but it was clear he wanted out of the deal at that time, and I think any reasonable person would have let him out for the good of everyone, and been happy to take 10% of his day 2 equity.

Find it hard to believe a stand up guy like Tim would have had his motivation lessened by only having 7% of himself!

Your whole issue was that he was freerolling you in the beginning by being in a position to keep your money if he didn't cash. At the point you got your money back, you were in a position to freeroll him because you couldn't lose anything. You were content to keep the money, and try to argue that you deserved the whole 10%.

This argument doesn't make any sense at all. Whether or not tmay sent him the money and whether or not redgrape sent it back are not relevant. Why would they be?

Neither party is a threat to drop of the face of the earth with the $1k. Whose account it's in couldn't matter less.


He didn't offer this so redgrape didn't have the opportunity to accept or reject it. Until it started becoming reasonably clear that he couldn't just cancel the action altogether tmay didn't show any interest in giving redgrape anything.