/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49361916
based
QRD on 1170? i know there was whale faggotry, but didn't hear any updates on it lately
regards,
300k pnkies

>>49361961
dear 300k pinkies,
clement first attacked the technical court, now he attacked the blockchain court. we will serve him the needful justice
signed, pepe the jury + executioner

>>49361978
based
may they be killed and gutted like the fish that they are

requesting an "it's over" edit of clement

didnt it just get appealed?

what's the case about and why is clement pushing it so hard

>>49362898
i read the docs and its an insurance claim for a bridge exploit i guess? did the insurer attack the court ? all the round justifications suggest that the jury wanted to vote for the claimant

>>49362898
Clement is testing the system

>>49363137
cope, he's just a greedy retard undermining his own project

>>49363171
Literally giving you free money

>>49362991
no.
tldr
avraham gets insurance and 47min later bridges usdn from waves to mainnet and the bridge delays due to suspicious activity.
usdn loses value during the delay and avraham sells the usdn as soon as it gets to mainnet. he is claiming the value lost from not being able to bridge instantly.

the case is clear to me because the state of the world on dispute creation had the unslashed finance insurance policy. and this policy says that there's a 10 waiting period from the time to acquire the insurance to the moment you are covered. the event occurred during this period, so it's not covered.

both sides got entangled into dumb arguments and got so deep on discussing nonsense. i hope jurors do some due diligence but my prediction is that the result is going to be random due to the overbearing evidence that obfuscated the case. if the result was rational (reject) it will be randomly selected, so not for rational reasons

PNK is wine and anyone that says PNK is fine is an obvious nigger

>>49365376
>PNK is wine
based

>>49365306
The policy details weren't available at the time the claim was raised though, no one is disputing this. Avraham even asked them for it before he raised the claim and they refused to provide it; pic related. Thus the policy details are effectively empty at the time the claim was made and you have to rely on UnslashedFinance's other material that was public at the time, which give no reason to reject Avraham's claim.

>>49365877
checked, based & redpilled

>>49365376
PNK is fine

>>49367275

Why the fuck does this coin have a '?' under max supply on CoinGecko, does that mean there is inflation or they will print more?

>>49367275
no PNK is wine

>>49367809
Like a fine wine

>>49367747
yes devs can create more tokens if they need

>>49365877
not available when the claim was made.
but they were available when the claim was challenged, and that's the state of the world the jurors must take into account (state of the world as dispute creation)

>>49368260
This!

>>49368260
but can they redeem more tokens if they sneed?

>>49368351
Ridiculous. Following this logic, UnslashedFinance could arbitrarily change the policy however they want to reject any claim, as long as they do so before filing the challenge.

The claim must be judged on the state of the world when the insurance was purchased because that's what the claimant actually paid for, not whatever random shit unslashedF made up after the fact.

>>49368907
Like for example, imagine Proof of Humanity changed their policy to reject fat people AFTER some fat guy had already submitted his profile. That's tantamount to stealing his deposit. It's not justice if you rule against someone based on rules they didn't even agree to.

And as the general court says
>Jurors should not rule in favor of a side who have engaged in immoral activities

>>49368907
>on the state of the world when the insurance was purchased
are you on drugs? the insurance that was paid for had no policy. do we just refuse to arbitrate?
are you saying that then avraham can make whatever absurdly high claim he feels like, and because there was no policy when he bought (which he was made aware of) then he cannot be judged by it?
>>49368965
>avraham bought nothing so unslashed finance is literally stealing and they have to pay any claim
no, avraham bought nothing. when you buy nothing and you get rekt, it's your fault. the frontend was clear on the policy not being defined. when you buy that, as a client it is implied that you are accepting the insurance will take place on whatever terms they decide are acceptable.
also if it wasn't obvious from the beginning that avraham was trying to do exactly this, he started bridging 47min after buying a policy that didn't exist.

>>49370532
>what is primary document
>t. adhd manchild lacking attention span to read mizu-sama's 30 page report

>>49371140
>see primary document
>primary document references cover policy
>see cover policy
>cover policy says there's a waiting period

b-but I voted to help nose-kun make money, I have vested interests! better make shit up like ignoring the cover policy, I'm sure that's a totally reasonable and unbiased assumption to make

>>49371576
>buy IRL insurance
>links to secondary document
>secondary document says fingerboxes are insured
>get fingerbox stolen
>make claim
>secondary document has now changed without warning: "FINGERBOXES NOT INSURED, SUCKER"
>go to court with proof secondary document changed without warning
>judge says he doesn't care because primary document says to look at linked document and linked document says not insured
Hint: that last line is never happening IRL because it's retarded and the judge will laugh the insurance company lawyers out of the courtroom.

>>49371806
if this was supposed to be the case, it should have been stated in the primary document. otherwise, the jurors are forced to act on the default present in the general court.
if you're going to go autistic with what you can project from the primary document (like Avraham side is doing) then it's only fair you get slashed by more powerful, technically correct answers.

also, you added a fantasy example in which the insurance had been defined before, and then changed. how about on your example start with a policy that quite literally didn't fucking exist and was published after the event?
>legacy justice
are we talking about a justice system that makes shit on the fly? trusts witnesses more than evidence? is moved by absurd moral arguments? kleros is not there yet. this is a privately settled dispute.

PNK is like a fine wine; it only gets better as it ages

>>49372049
bonjour clement