5 ms·

Yuck. I’m sick of living in a society where wealthy people are able to bully and harass others. No corporation would feel bound to honor a price tossed out ca

Yuck. I’m sick of living in a society where wealthy people are able to bully and harass others. No corporation would feel bound to honor a price tossed out casually in an email with nothing signed — and it’s disgusting they’re suing an old man to bully him. Why is it crypto people are so gross? — how can I take the current state of crypto seriously when a “major” platform acts like petulant middle schoolers?

TAForObvReasons 5y ago
> Merryman responded on July 1: “The price for wormhole.com is a firm US $ 50,000. -Dick-.” > Merryman hadn’t been serious about selling, he said, throwing out what he viewed as a high offer to get them to go away. If he wasn't serious about selling, he should have said so and moved on. It seems smarmy to quote an offer price without a sincere intent to sell.
- djohnston 5y ago
  Sure, that's the most you can say. Without a signed agreement he has no obligation to listen to them or sell.
  - rosndo 5y ago
    Why would an email not be an agreement?
    - djohnston 5y ago
      Its not legally binding, are you asking why an email isn't legally binding?
      - rosndo 5y ago
        Yeah, why not?
        ipaddr 5y ago
        Because a window isn't a door
        rosndo 5y ago
        So you don’t actually know?
- AdmiralAsshat 5y ago
  "smarmy" is not illegal. It's also not a binding contract.
- boesboes 5y ago
  I dunno, as long as there is no contract I dont see why he can’t reconsider. I mean, offers are retracted all the time
- copperx 5y ago
  I think we've found the potential buyer.
- netram88 5y ago
  >It seems smarmy to quote an offer price without a sincere intent to sell. Merryman is 79, and receiving emails about selling the domain he's owned for decades. He has never asked for these emails, and just wants to be left alone. He throws a highball offer, hoping they'll go away. He then clarifies that he doesn't want to sell, which he is of course fully allowed to do. Then they sue him. I would say there are smarmy actions in here, but not on the part of Merryman.
  - shepardrtc 5y ago
    > He then clarifies that he doesn't want to sell He increased the price to 100k, then 200k, then said no.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- juancb 5y ago
  Perhaps a more direct "fuck off" would have been better? View it from the eyes of a guy that retired in 2001, or any reasonable person, and $50k for a domain is an absurd amount that should have been tantamount to "I'm not selling, take off."
  - rosndo 5y ago
    >or any reasonable person There are many reasonable people who understand that $50k is nothing for a decent domain name.
    - cbozeman 5y ago
      And I guarantee you there are far more reasonable people who don't.
      - mr_toad 5y ago
        Not knowing what something is worth won’t get you out of a contract.
- Jaepa 5y ago
  I think he was serious about selling it. But he was so severely low-balled initially that he doesn't trust Jump to give him a fair price. Jump's original bid is 2,500 dollars.
gruez 5y ago
>Why is it crypto people are so gross? — how can I take the current state of crypto seriously when a “major” platform acts like petulant middle schoolers? see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error People/companies suing people over domains isn't new. See for instance, nissan.com
- moron4hire 5y ago
  So what?
  - gruez 5y ago
    I was refuting the parent comment. If you have trouble understanding the significance/consequence of that act, or that "so what?" is an adequate reply to that, then it's clear that engaging with you is not worth my time.
    - moron4hire 5y ago
      But it's not a refutation at all
      - gruez 5y ago
        1. maybe next time you should make a more substantive comment rather than something vague like "so what?" 2. What is a refutation then? The OP was the equivalent of getting cut off by a BMW, then lamenting how BMW drivers are "are so gross" and how you can them seriously when they "acts like petulant middle schoolers". If you don't think that counts as a refutation, what does?
        robertlagrant 5y ago
        You haven't demonstrated how your analogy is useful. OP's statement wasn't from a single instance of wrongdoing.
criddell 5y ago
> Why is it crypto people are so gross? Yeah, I don’t get how they see this as a good move.
t_mann 5y ago
Why is it crypto people are so gross? Sorry to shatter your illusions, that's not specific to crypto at all. Disney lawyers are far less child-friendly than the company's content, and so is pretty much every major corporation. Just this week, I remember Zara (the fashion retailer) sueing a one-woman-run boutique named House of Zana. A bit before they also sued a women's empowerment business called Tara Sartorial (yes, because of likeness of the names). The number of tiny independents that Jack Wolfskin has sued for putting anything resembling an animal footprint onto pretty much any fabric is countless. We could go on here.
- zmgsabst 5y ago
  I don’t see how outlining other gross behavior makes crypto people less gross. Eg, Disney is currently suffering major financial losses due to being associated with child grooming and trying to overturn democratically passed laws. Is your point that I should accept the grotesquery of a major company suing an old man because others behave badly? …How does that make sense? > Sorry to shatter your illusions, that's not specific to crypto at all. This is also a petty ad hominem that requires an uncharitable assumption about me. Far from shattering my “illusions”, you just revealed your own cynicism and low standards.
  - t_mann 5y ago
    So do you have issues taking fashion retailers seriously because major players act like "petulant middle schoolers" (your words)? Do you have problems taking pretty much every economic sector seriously because major players act in an incredibly petty way heaping frightening lawsuits on unwitting individuals? Or are you just holding crypto companies to a different standard because you have other reservations about the sector?
  - JaimeThompson 5y ago
    >Disney is currently suffering major financial losses due to being associated with child grooming and trying to overturn democratically passed laws. >This is also a petty ad hominem that requires an uncharitable assumption about me. The contrast between those two statements is most interesting.
JaimeThompson 5y ago
>Why is it crypto people are so gross? They are desperate to become the new middle men so they fight dirty.
everyone 5y ago
"Why is it crypto people are so gross?" They're conmen running a scam, they're gonna be super gross of course.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
0x4d464d48 5y ago
"Why is it crypto people are so gross?" https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/dominant-strategy/ https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/ot... Because some people do not give a fuck. We're talking about people who support valuation of assets based on speculation with no actual economic value while pumping out oceans of CO2 and wasting copious amounts of energy to have computers, to simplify a bit, guess a number somewhere between 0 and 2^255 for the privelege. Seems on brand.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ericd 5y ago
Jump Trading was founded in 1999, they’re traditional finance people, not “crypto people”.
- j4yav 5y ago
  They seem to have since then moved to operating in crypto (tfa says they want the domain for their crypto business).
- nneonneo 5y ago
  They’re buying this domain solely to use it for their wormhole network, which bridges blockchains together. So, in this context, they most definitely are “crypto people”.
  - ericd 5y ago
    I know it’s for a crypto related project, I read the article, but I’d argue that the average finance person adding another asset class that they trade is substantially different from the archetype that most would describe as “crypto people”.
    - siftrics 5y ago
      They are absolutely "crypto people." They have had nigh the most crypto engineering power of any firm in the entire world for like 5-6 years now. They have literally hundreds of extremely smart people who have been in crypto since the beginning.
      - ericd 5y ago
        Ah ok, thanks for the context! The people I know in hedge funds are far away from being what most would think of as crypto people, but perhaps Jump is a bit of an exception.
- pgwhalen 5y ago
  Most crypto people are traditional finance people at this point, this is lost in a lot of conversation about crypto.
sacrosancty 5y ago
To be fair, he bullied them first by lying about his offer, even insisting that it was "firm" when it really wasn't at all. Those people are assholes when they win their smaller-scale bullying game. He just happens to have barked at a bigger dog than himself.

TAForObvReasons 5y ago

> Merryman responded on July 1: “The price for wormhole.com is a firm US $ 50,000. -Dick-.” > Merryman hadn’t been serious about selling, he said, throwing out what he viewed as a high offer to get them to go away. If he wasn't serious about selling, he should have said so and moved on. It seems smarmy to quote an offer price without a sincere intent to sell.

djohnston 5y ago
Sure, that's the most you can say. Without a signed agreement he has no obligation to listen to them or sell.
- rosndo 5y ago
  Why would an email not be an agreement?
  - djohnston 5y ago
    Its not legally binding, are you asking why an email isn't legally binding?
    - rosndo 5y ago
      Yeah, why not?
      - ipaddr 5y ago
        Because a window isn't a door
        rosndo 5y ago
        So you don’t actually know?
AdmiralAsshat 5y ago
"smarmy" is not illegal. It's also not a binding contract.
boesboes 5y ago
I dunno, as long as there is no contract I dont see why he can’t reconsider. I mean, offers are retracted all the time
copperx 5y ago
I think we've found the potential buyer.
netram88 5y ago
>It seems smarmy to quote an offer price without a sincere intent to sell. Merryman is 79, and receiving emails about selling the domain he's owned for decades. He has never asked for these emails, and just wants to be left alone. He throws a highball offer, hoping they'll go away. He then clarifies that he doesn't want to sell, which he is of course fully allowed to do. Then they sue him. I would say there are smarmy actions in here, but not on the part of Merryman.
- shepardrtc 5y ago
  > He then clarifies that he doesn't want to sell He increased the price to 100k, then 200k, then said no.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
juancb 5y ago
Perhaps a more direct "fuck off" would have been better? View it from the eyes of a guy that retired in 2001, or any reasonable person, and $50k for a domain is an absurd amount that should have been tantamount to "I'm not selling, take off."
- rosndo 5y ago
  >or any reasonable person There are many reasonable people who understand that $50k is nothing for a decent domain name.
  - cbozeman 5y ago
    And I guarantee you there are far more reasonable people who don't.
    - mr_toad 5y ago
      Not knowing what something is worth won’t get you out of a contract.
Jaepa 5y ago
I think he was serious about selling it. But he was so severely low-balled initially that he doesn't trust Jump to give him a fair price. Jump's original bid is 2,500 dollars.

gruez 5y ago

>Why is it crypto people are so gross? — how can I take the current state of crypto seriously when a “major” platform acts like petulant middle schoolers? see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error People/companies suing people over domains isn't new. See for instance, nissan.com

moron4hire 5y ago
So what?
- gruez 5y ago
  I was refuting the parent comment. If you have trouble understanding the significance/consequence of that act, or that "so what?" is an adequate reply to that, then it's clear that engaging with you is not worth my time.
  - moron4hire 5y ago
    But it's not a refutation at all
    - gruez 5y ago
      1. maybe next time you should make a more substantive comment rather than something vague like "so what?" 2. What is a refutation then? The OP was the equivalent of getting cut off by a BMW, then lamenting how BMW drivers are "are so gross" and how you can them seriously when they "acts like petulant middle schoolers". If you don't think that counts as a refutation, what does?
      - robertlagrant 5y ago
        You haven't demonstrated how your analogy is useful. OP's statement wasn't from a single instance of wrongdoing.

criddell 5y ago

> Why is it crypto people are so gross? Yeah, I don’t get how they see this as a good move.

t_mann 5y ago

Why is it crypto people are so gross? Sorry to shatter your illusions, that's not specific to crypto at all. Disney lawyers are far less child-friendly than the company's content, and so is pretty much every major corporation. Just this week, I remember Zara (the fashion retailer) sueing a one-woman-run boutique named House of Zana. A bit before they also sued a women's empowerment business called Tara Sartorial (yes, because of likeness of the names). The number of tiny independents that Jack Wolfskin has sued for putting anything resembling an animal footprint onto pretty much any fabric is countless. We could go on here.

zmgsabst 5y ago
I don’t see how outlining other gross behavior makes crypto people less gross. Eg, Disney is currently suffering major financial losses due to being associated with child grooming and trying to overturn democratically passed laws. Is your point that I should accept the grotesquery of a major company suing an old man because others behave badly? …How does that make sense? > Sorry to shatter your illusions, that's not specific to crypto at all. This is also a petty ad hominem that requires an uncharitable assumption about me. Far from shattering my “illusions”, you just revealed your own cynicism and low standards.
- t_mann 5y ago
  So do you have issues taking fashion retailers seriously because major players act like "petulant middle schoolers" (your words)? Do you have problems taking pretty much every economic sector seriously because major players act in an incredibly petty way heaping frightening lawsuits on unwitting individuals? Or are you just holding crypto companies to a different standard because you have other reservations about the sector?
- JaimeThompson 5y ago
  >Disney is currently suffering major financial losses due to being associated with child grooming and trying to overturn democratically passed laws. >This is also a petty ad hominem that requires an uncharitable assumption about me. The contrast between those two statements is most interesting.

JaimeThompson 5y ago

>Why is it crypto people are so gross? They are desperate to become the new middle men so they fight dirty.

everyone 5y ago

"Why is it crypto people are so gross?" They're conmen running a scam, they're gonna be super gross of course.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

0x4d464d48 5y ago

"Why is it crypto people are so gross?" https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/dominant-strategy/ https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/ot... Because some people do not give a fuck. We're talking about people who support valuation of assets based on speculation with no actual economic value while pumping out oceans of CO2 and wasting copious amounts of energy to have computers, to simplify a bit, guess a number somewhere between 0 and 2^255 for the privelege. Seems on brand.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ericd 5y ago

Jump Trading was founded in 1999, they’re traditional finance people, not “crypto people”.

j4yav 5y ago
They seem to have since then moved to operating in crypto (tfa says they want the domain for their crypto business).
nneonneo 5y ago
They’re buying this domain solely to use it for their wormhole network, which bridges blockchains together. So, in this context, they most definitely are “crypto people”.
- ericd 5y ago
  I know it’s for a crypto related project, I read the article, but I’d argue that the average finance person adding another asset class that they trade is substantially different from the archetype that most would describe as “crypto people”.
  - siftrics 5y ago
    They are absolutely "crypto people." They have had nigh the most crypto engineering power of any firm in the entire world for like 5-6 years now. They have literally hundreds of extremely smart people who have been in crypto since the beginning.
    - ericd 5y ago
      Ah ok, thanks for the context! The people I know in hedge funds are far away from being what most would think of as crypto people, but perhaps Jump is a bit of an exception.
pgwhalen 5y ago
Most crypto people are traditional finance people at this point, this is lost in a lot of conversation about crypto.

sacrosancty 5y ago

To be fair, he bullied them first by lying about his offer, even insisting that it was "firm" when it really wasn't at all. Those people are assholes when they win their smaller-scale bullying game. He just happens to have barked at a bigger dog than himself.