Bitcoin Forum

bitcoinica still owes me 40 btc, im one of the lucky ones i got 50% . the lasted hack seemed like a inside job(and it the rest of the catastrophe could be too). im now suggesting a scammer tag of all persons related to bitcoinica(genjix, phantomcircut, zhou, donald...), at least until they have payed us back at least 100%.

i would suggest that you post all the evidence you have against them in this thread so that the mods can make an informed oppinion about the suggested scammer tag(that was what BadBear said we should). it would also be good to have all the evidence in one place, if(WHEN!!!) authorities gets involved.

also plese put in your sigs how much bitcoinica owes you if you like(see my sig).

Ah yes, the primal need to have a scapegoat. It's weird how the poor people with the fewest lost coins are the loudest and most assholish in general, whereas the ones that have lost the most (such as Roger) are at least somewhat civil and polite.

well maybe rjk. perhaps those with the huge holdings are just still in shock/denial about the whole affair and hope is the easiest option.

its all very well for me to sweep my tiny 7.5btc loss under the carpet and see this as pretty obvious insider action from a neutral point of view but maybe I wouldn't want to hear any such 'told you so' logical talk if I had 7.5k btc in there...

you may be right, but that would be because if you don't have much too loose you can afford to be straight out. On the other hand if you do have much too loose you gonna be careful on what to say.


They owe me 9 btc (and maybe 5 dollars).

I'm not saying whether anyone should be angry (they have every right to be), but I don't think some aspects are being approached correctly or maturely.

excacly! i have already given up on my 40 btc, but it would be nice to have them back(i don't really have alot of money)

@rjk: fuck you, that 40 btc is more then i have in my bank account, im a poor student, asshole! Roger would survive his losses.

QED

You are making stupid assumptions.

o.0 the whiny little kids come out to play. Who didn't follow the #1 rule of investment "Don't play with funds you can't afford to loose!"

This is EXACTLY is...  well put..

im perfectly capable of dealing with losses. i had a stop order. but i kind of expected that i would have access to my money.

and no im not whining, i have accepted my loss(but it would still be a great to have them back), because of the fuck up they made, and i hope that the community will never ever trust them again.

it is my right to be angry of their incompetence.

should i remove Zhou, from the post? i seems innocent, and even trying to pay people back with his own funds. but he still could be the inside person, because he have intimate knowlegde of the system... or be somehow related to the mess.

what to do?

Only too true  :'(

However given the to date handling of the bitcoinica train wreck and something like https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=65867.0 where the scamming is even more blatant than the bitcoinica mess Bitcoinica hardly rates tagging or even talk of it, if that other thread is a rule of thumb for how admins here apply their "judgement".

Personally I don't believe there has been any actual scamming at all here, more it all being the misplacement of funds with people much too young, incompetent and inexperienced to deal with an actual business.

I really don't know what kind of penalty this will be or what pain this should cause to them.

I suppose they really don't know what to do, they have no concept at all...

I'm waiting for refunding my 64.01 btc and it maters much to me... but a scammer-tag? for what...

damage their reputation, so no one will ever deal with them again, and they will die old sad and lonely...

i also would have suggest that their should have their balls cut off, so their could not reproduce. but i think its illegal.

Scammer tag is long overdue. No security experts can be so careless to allow this to happen. Fool me once...., but fool me three times in a fucking row???

I voted no because they did return some of what the owe which is commendable given their predicament. I also value the principle of innocent until proven guilty and I haven't seen any proof yet that they are guilty of a scam.

You clearly don't understand mob rule.

There are no legal proceedings in place yet. Problem is how to convince a curt to accept "playmoney" as value.

the frenchmen have already been onto mtgox even with their involvment with playmoney.

I don't want to see Zhou get one, he wasn't proveably involved and he sold the site long before the hack.

For all of the current management, I believe they should be given scammer tags unless they're willing to disclose:

- The management structure at Bitcoinica, who is involved, who was involved.
- A police report number. Two hacks in two months needs to be reported to the proper authorities. Seems very suspicious that a group of statists who have yearned for regulation are so against this.
- The exact BTC and USD total of claims approved and the exact BTC and USD total of funds delivered.

In case anyone's not on the right page, the fact that they themself have approved claims and not paid them makes this very much a scam. Bulanula got a scammer tag over 22.5 BTC (about $100 at the time), and these guys are being negligent with over a million dollars.

As it stands right now at most some people might deserve a NEGLIGENT tag but labeling them scammers, I don't see how you can rationally support that.

That was about the fiat.

Oh and of course they are hypocrites.

There's no real evidence that they did anything. Lots of speculation and circumstantial stuff, a lot of which is hearsay.

Besides, now that the lawyers are involved, there's likely to be court proceedings, so maybe best to wait and see if they say they are guilty before the forum declares them guilty. They'll have access to all the facts at least.  

+1

Yeah - sorry - i just can't buy into the story that they got owned multiple times, and are the security gurus they claim to be. One of the two is false.

Take your pick, negligent morons, of plain old thieves. Either way, to run the business knowing that you're either, is a SCAM. Thus, they are scammers in my book.

They have repeatedly been less than truthful, if not outright dishonest. They have repaid their friends before others, and then suffered more losses due to thier delays, negligence and / or theft.

I've suspected criminal behavior because of the mounting numbers of red flags in the whole process from the time zhou tong started cashing out, and having slow withdrawals during major market moves. I suspected then, and noted it, that they were bordering on insolvency. I continue to suspect that they hid the majority of insolvency, and the thefts were perpetrated to hide this fact. The timings were all too very convenient. With this final one, I don't think the series of crimes is any longer plausible.

Given the behavior I've noted for the past few months, I am pretty sure that Zhoutong knew there was something up (thus he was cashing out, and "leaving bitcoin" -- I'm also pretty sure Patrick knew what was going on, and has carefully spoken so as to not "lie" to anyone, while completely failing to tell much , if any, truth. How much did any one in the fund know? hmm. Hard to say - that's why - I'm not sure who the criminal is here, but I'm sure it's an insider.

I've talked with Patrick enough on IRC to come to the conclusion that he isn't an operations or security expert, no matter his own opinion. I've also come to the conclusion he's a pretty sharp guy nonetheless. It just seems to me very hard to swallow that they've just been guilty of incompetence and stupidity. They have not shown enough of either to make that plausible. There must be an additional factor. If that additional factor is not criminal, I cannot imagine what it must be.

the question is really: do you think that they should be beaten with a bat, for the mistakes/crimes/scamming/whatever they have made, or not?
its really that simple. to hell if we only get to put a incorrect scammer tag on them. do they deserve it?

MD said in another thread, that it  was quite convienet for them to get hacked again, when he and 2 others began to sue them...
of cource its circumstantial, but i think that its way more possible that they are skewing us over and over again, then that they are trying to pay there customers... just saying.

+1 either they scammed us, for our money. or they scammed Tihan's company, because they are noob that claims to be pros.
Therefor they deserved the scammer tag.

good point!

Violence is never a solution to any problem other than self defense. Ever.

1. Leave money in bucket shop created by 17yo in 4 days time which was hacked at least 2 times before the 3rd and now 4th time and manage to be that much of a gambler or a sucker for interest rates to leave your money there
2. Bucket shop closes down
3. Crying ensues, they all should have scammer tag :'( :'( :'(

BTW, there’s a bit too much zhoutong dick sucking going on for my tastes. As far as I see, he is the only winner here, since he managed to sell off the company to a sucker before it went kaboom with profit, and now doing some PR stunt donating 5k of it to bribe the suckers here to view him as the hero.

If anyone should get the scammer tag, it’s probably him for veiling the change of corporate ownership ever since Nov. 2011 and deceiving customers who explicitely trusted him. And of course for not securing this shit in the first place, despite having been warned (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2973313).

I had all of one bitcoin at bitcoinica. I never trusted those bitcoinica guys because they're statists and promote regulating bitcoin. Statists are never that competent - be sure of that.

I think we need a new tag for them, like "FELONS"

oh please drop the libertard bullshit, it only shows that your IQ is under 70.

Finally someone with a working brain.
And what about that other PR stunt about the "I'm leaving Bitcoin" ? ;)

I am so sad! You took my petition idea and turned into a poll. I was given them 24 hours to offer up proof that a police report was filed.

I voted. Thanks for the poll, bud. Now back to reading that thread. Still 3 pages from the end. 2,000 new page views since I started reading there. Not a slow reading, just want to digest every word. Glad it's all in 10pt font.  ;)

~Bruno~

Hazek, I'm happy to see that your ignore label is less than orange now.

I vote no, because a scammer tag would serve no purpose other than as a slap in the face.

you do know that people does not always behave rationally, right? and that it is much more fun not to.

Says the person suggesting we should pick up bats and solve this problem like they use to do back when we lived in a cave..  ::)

If anyone is going to be beating on anyone else, please direct your threats at the actual hacker(s).

And how exactly does that make it a good solution or a solution at all? For someone telling people they have a low IQ you seem to be have a lot of problems with thinking correctly yourself.

They have agreed that they owe people money. They have refused to pay that money in full, supposedly because they've lost it.

How is this anything other than a scam?

Put another way, if I borrow 100 BTC from you, then fail to secure it and subsequently fail to pay you back, am I a scammer or not?

If you put $100,000 in an account with Chase and they don't return it upon request (within the terms of your agreement), would you consider that acceptable?

+1

They still owe me 225 BTC, but this is my thought exactly - certainly something looks a bit fishy here, but I'm not rushing to judgement.

True. but i want some action for my money, isn't it fair that i beat them up? i have payed them 40btc for it?  :P

btw. it was more a generalt comment on him, as he is always polluting the forum with this crap. im actually creative in my attempts to disrupt good forum culture, while he is just repeating the same libertard stuff over and over again...

Thank you for confirming your position as a useless virgin troll.

is there any hacker(s) involved? or is it just fiction made by the bitcoin consultancy?

i really having a hard time, finding out what the hell is happening, but it seems like an inside job.

Well if we ever want to become more than just "libertards" we have to learn how2 deal with those kind of incidents.
What about selecting a group of prominent members of the bitcoin community to form a jury and judge them... Since this is just about the scammer label for now there aren't even that high of stakes...

baseball bats are much more effective, and at a lower cost.
/caveman

Bitcoinica was a scam.  I mean it cant just be a coincidence that they where hacked 3 times in a roll.  First the linode server was hacked.  Then there email was hacked and now there Mt. Gox account was hacked.  If you asked me it sounds fishy. Now there only giving us 66% of are money.  Thats what all scammers do they steal your money and then give you just some of it back so they get away with it.

 a big fkin scam..

Scammer tags is not enough. We want a sticky post that says to be wary of putting any money in Intersango's exchange as well if not on the main discussion board at least in the trading subforum

The actual hackers.....you say that like those hackers are "some mysterious people we don't even know" - riiiiiiiight.

You know the proper way to avoid violence for theft?

Don't commit thefts.

When you steal from people, you take the risk that you fuck with someone dangerous. I'm not dangerous myself, but I'm sure there's more than one bitcoiner who is VERY dangerous, especially to those people who would steal his money.

We expect the government to protect us from thieves like this, but when they will not, justice still must be served. You simply cannot allow the same person or persons to repeatedly steal from you.

In many places, allowing someone to steal the money (actively, or passively through negligence) that is in your care is punished just as if you'd stolen it yourself (because in so many cases you have)

Punish the real hackers: The owners and operators of bitcoinica. Hopefully the lawyers will work well enough before the bat owners come out.

I've seen several variations on the "this is just too convienient"  theme but I'm surprised that the alternate angle hasn't been mentioned. If you think this isn't a coincidence then you could just as well say it's too INconveinient. I mean for all the people involved this is the absolute worst case scenario. If there is something more then meets the eye, i would concider looking at people who would stand to gain from the damage (financial, reputation, trust) done to the parties involved or to bitcoin in general.

(I'm not defending anyone just giving an alternate view)

Stop putting words in my mouth, I never said ANYTHING of the sort.
And furthermore, I'm fairly sure this could happen to any exchange, it just so happened that Bitcoinica/Intersango was targeted. If the hacker ever decided to shift targets, some really ugly shit could start happening.

If you stopped making inane threats, Mr. "Not Dangerous Myself", you might be able to buckle down and find out exactly who is behind it, assuming you can do some basic entry-level internet sleuthing. The sticking point right now is whether the evidence is enough to convict the asshole that did it, not who it is, or where he is, or any other BS like that.

Has anyone who lost money reported the theft to the police ?

If bitcoinica is failing to do so cant one of the victims report lost funds ?

Genjix and phantomcircuit are not scammers.  If this was an inside job, these two people were not in on it.

i understand everyone's pissyness - but honestly, what really would come out of a scammer tag?  will that get our funds back?  its nothing but a freaking combination of letters under ones username....and we all know who is tied with bitcoinica....

+1 more than likely the new and former ownership decided to collaborate   >:(

just because they are reputable forum members or that you know them personally, dosn't mean that they can't be scammers.

and either they lied and scammed Tihan, because they said that they are security experts(which is clearly not the case)
and/or they scammed us, because they stole from us.

if you don't want to give them the scammer tag, could you please give them a incompetent-and-lieing-idiot tag?

+1

Well, I don't care to listen to their stories anymore to be honest. I have lost quite a bit of money and two months of my time reading up on this shittrack of excuses, agitations, and bitcoinica team members threatening its customers.  The community deserves to be warned of incompetent security experts like Patrick who wouldn't pass internet security 101. Hasn't he jumped ship now? There have to be consequences now before they fuck up their Intersango customers, too. If a scammer tag and a sticky post are all this forum has to offer it should be used, or some new tag needs to be created.

I call on team Bitcoinica (all involved) to answer honestly, it was a scam? Just yes or no .. Is that so hard? I think many people read the answer is "yes" will save a lot of personal time, not reading this fucking long thread (in my case, a heavy - with the help a translator)

I didn't put workls in your mouth - I said you said something "like" something. But then, I see you don't read very well either.

Also, I expressed shock that no one had carried out a threat. I didn't make a threat, nor would I - I don't make threats that I wouldn't carry out, and I'm certainly not going to england to go collect a few hundred bucks from these asshats.

But, true to your normal fashion, it's troll first, read later. You should definitely enroll in a program to improve your reading comprehension.

The sticking point is to FIND the asshole who did it. I'm quite sure that asshole is right under our noses, but the shit smell around here is so prevalent no one will notice the difference. Everything about this case is seriously fishy, and screams of insider involvement.

Scammers or not, someone involved in bitcoinica is a fucking moron and shouldn't be trusted with a single dime, satoshi, eurocent or any other valuable. But, then, we all like to protect our friends, don't we, even if they're somewhere between criminally stupid and negligent, or just criminal 

Yeah - people should be warned before they put their money in a service run by ANY of the people involved in bitcoinica. Incompetent, criminal, or just negligent, they simply are not qualified to care for other people's money.

Like I said, do a little bit of gumshoe work if you're going to spout off about it. The dude has already been doxed several times. LIKE I SAID, the sticking point is whether there is enough evidence, NOT where or whom the guy is.
Improve your own reading comprehension, fool.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Narrowing it down further, Roger Ver stands behind Zhou Tong, and Tihan Seale name seems to have some traction for being in the clear. That leaves only Patrick, who I keep reading has jumped ship, but I have yet to read proof of that.

~Bruno~

Someone should arrest Patrick before he actually jumps onto a ship to a remote island.

Tihan also stands behind Zhou to a large extent. 


http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4241249

Donald has been the invisible man in all of this.  His actions should be no less subject to scrutiny than the actions of anyone else involved in this clusterfuck - and neither, for that matter, should Wendon's (I do wonder if he's the nameless minority limited partner).

Are you saying you know the identity of the thief? Please enlighten us.


Did not shakaru get the tag because of debts relating to a claimed series of thefts, how is this any different to people involved in running bitcoinica?

What scammer tag will do is help protect people from their future actions. This is important because they have been criminally negligent if not directly involved in the theft (which is, as someone noted, essentially the same thing in many jurisdictions).

These people should never be trusted with anything of value again. That they have repeatedly demonstrated an inability follow even the most basic security and resiliency paradigms is irrefutable.

Theymos, if you are willing to vouch for these individuals and their actions lead to losses for bitcoinica customers, you should be willing to wear the scammer tag yourself.

I dont think the bitcoin consultancy are scammers I think they got fed a shit sandwich.

Hopefully the users dont have to also eat the sandwich.

they are his personal friends, give him break he is unable to see things clearly(sadly he is a admin too, not much we can do).


@theymos: are you willing to pay my 40btc?(aka your non-scammer friends debt.)

I predict everyone involved gets to chow down on an XL shit sammich. Learn your lessons you greedy bastards.

http://www.filehurricane.com/photos/562008102154AM_495.jpg

+1  :D

You really think bitcoinica was run by a goat ?

I thought a goat was a smart animal with some security expertise and a real sense of responsibility.

Bahahahaa

http://smartgoat.com/images/goat.jpg

Has anyone received funds back yet ? I dont know about a scammer label but maybe a "Consumer Alert" or "Under Review"  is warranted untill the claims process is dealt with.

Some people have posted that they've received 50% of their claim back.  I don't think anyone knows how the latest compromise will affect the payout process other than the fact that payouts will be reduced.

I don't see any point in giving Bitcoinica as an entity a scammer tag.  It's not operating at the moment.  It's just a brand name.  It may never resume trading and if it does it may be under the control of parties who were unrelated to this series of disasters.  If the same principals were to launch a similar endeavour or relaunch Bitcoinica then I think that a cautionary note would be appropriate but it would be meaningless right now.

You reasoning is wrong. Some of the same people run Intersango. Their customers deserve a warning, or do they not? So, if Bitcoinica was a scam, which more likely than not it was, then it is very much necessary and meaningful to give a scammer tag to these individuals and consequently to Intersango LTD. Either it was a scam (which most people by now have agreed upon) or it wasn't. After reading 76+ pages of so called "security" investigation and "payout" threads for over 2 months, there is little to nothing that can prove these guys are innocent. In fact, you even get a pretty good picture of their personalities, particularly about one very cranky, and arrogant, and even blackmailing Patrick.

Company name changes on the day of the hack? OMG.

Hacked three times in a row, unlocked accounts after the second hack? Come on. How naive do you have to be to buy into that story? When do we see the scammer tag applied? Who is responsible for it on this forum?

Has anyone sued yet?

yep, some has. but not me.

That was kind of my point.  If you're going to apply the tag, then you do it to the individuals rather than to Bitcoinica as an entity because if Bitcoinica never operates again then having scammer tag against the Bitcoinica Consultancy account really doesn't serve as an alert to anyone.  You're right that some of the same people run Intersango, but it's not clear whether all of the Intersango guys were formally involved in Bitcoinica - if not, should the ones who weren't also get the tag?

Hey, stop that Bullshit!

Your reasoning is outright wired, arrogant and delusional.

Who is filling 76+ pages with assumptions, guessing, and musings?

Who is getting more and more thrilled and excited in constructing one conspiracy theory after another??

And what exactly does this prove? Only that you and your buddies are having fun playing detective here in these threads.



We all agree that Bitcoinica failed and neither the communication nor the payouts were handled as you'd expect.


But to apply a scammer tag to some individual people, you first need to come up with a proof (mind me, not some random guesses)
that exactly these people did purposefully trick and scam someone else with the goal of stealing money.

More specifically...

can you prove that Zhou Tong purposefully betrayed someone?
can you prove that Genjix purposefully betrayed someone?
can you prove that Patrick purposefully betrayed someone and ran with the money to the island?


No you cant. In fact, you guys are mud-slingers and witch hunters.


Come on, lets behave like adults and stick to the facts.

We know that there where insufficient security measures in place. But we don't know who exactly was responsible at what point and who was bound to care for some detail and failed to do so. In fact, the involved people cross-wise blame each other.

But we don't have the slightest proof, that they purposefully blame each other while in fact someone purposefully opened a backdoor somewhere for stealing money.

Next, we know the business people, namely Tihan and Donald Norman disagree on the question of responsibility.
But we don't have the slightest proof, that they purposefully set up this disagreement as a scam to buy time, while speculating with the money meanwhile.

Moreover, we know that the life database was destroyed by the hacker, but that some transfer logs and accounting snapshots where available, plus the data provided by the people in the claims process. We even know that some real scammers entered fake claims, because the total sum of claimed funds don't add up.
Yet we don't know what data is available and what is missing, and we don't know why the decision was made to pay some people and don't pay others. And we don't have the slightest proof, that those people having received a payment are affiliated in any way with the people processing the payouts. Just someone heard from someone else that someone else got the impression this might be the case.

And besides that information, we don't know much. We don't even know who is Bitcoinica. Who is/was the general partner at what time? How is the financial situation? Is the business insolvent? We've just heard lots of guesses and semi information on those core questions.

I voted, "I don't care", and I'm owed a lot.
This thread isn't helping anyone.

I could come up with about 20 qualificatives to describe them, but "Scammer" is not one of them yet.

No scamming going on here.

Take it from a man that knows how it's done :D

This is a joke ...

Voted "No" because you included genjix, I don't believe he can be a scammer.

Didn't he find a security hole on someone else's site and then report it instead of exploiting it? Also, Intersango always seemed the most professional among the exchanges.

Bitcoinica was one hack of a page, and caused chaos ever since I've known it. I think it's quite obvious on which side all of the nonsense grew. You can blame Intersango for the horrible mistake of buying into the mess. Or, for omitting to lock everything down the moment they got their hands on the hackathon. But that's not the same as being a scammer.

Bulanula received the scammer tag for much less. The fact that you wouldn't report a hundred-thousand dollar theft to the police alone deserves them the scammer tag.
I like genjix too, but he sits in the same boat as the rest of the crew I'm afraid.

Nice to see I am not the only one that sees the hypocrisy and unfairness here.

I don't give two potatoes about the tag but I care about being treated differently just because of what exactly ? I don't know ...

With them facing legal action and being in huge shit storm over Bitcoinica incident you would think some people would want others to be warned about dangers of using Intersango now.

Not that Gox is any better ( I have no agenda here just don't want more people to lose more BTC ).

Failure to report a theft to the police seriously suggests involvement in the crime. IMO, the chief suspects in this crime are THE ENTIRE BITCOINICA TEAM.

And, no - the story is now completely fucking implausible. I refuse to believe these people are that fucking stupid.

I've also seen how phantomcircuit acts around legal issues - I bet that guy was REALLY CAREFUL about creating evidence to tie himself to criminal wrongdoing. But, his attitude seriously makes me think him MORE than capable and willing to be involved. IMO, anyone who is that careful with what he says, and how he says it, is usually carefully covering his tracks and making sure he doesn't misspeak, or divulge real incriminating evidence.

But, on the other hand, it seems that we're all good to "trust our friends" - and like in the case of bitconiica, give them preferential treatment. I would expect no less favoritism to be shown here on the forums.

I'm glad I wrote off the money after the first hack - though I've hoped a couple times to actually get it back, it seemed obvious then that it was an inside job, and I have seen nothing to change this. I suppose the thing that most surprises me is that they actually had enough funds still somewhere "verifiable" to have another loss (i.e mtgox) - I really expected to find that all the claims of theft were false, and simply to cover up the glaring absence of customer funds (which I believe were depleted LONG BEFORE THE FIRST HACK)

Anyhow, I pretty much don't see the point in any of this. No one is getting anymore money back, and no one is going to listen about these guys. Intersango will eventually close, and customers will lose funds there, but no one will listen, so they'll lose those funds with or without a scammer tag. (but I'm quite sure the whole team deserves to be listed, because THEY ARE ALL FAILING TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH (including genjix)

They have withheld information. phantomcircuit said "it's too complicated"

Lies usually are too complicated to really tell effectively.

The truth will set you free.

Scammers or not, they're all a bunch of liars.

We should drop the effort of applying a SCAMMER tag.

In the light of the recently disclosed internal documents, it looks even more unlikely that the directly visible persons were acting with the goal of fraud or stealing money from their customers. From all real evidence available now, at least Amir, Patrick, Donald and Tihan don't appear as people pursuiting criminal goals. Running a buisness not "optimally" can mean a lot, but it's not a crime, for sure.

Having said that, it is still possible that the hacker(s) are lossely connected to the visible actors and got some insider information, which he/they exploited for their personal benefit. All I want to state is that it looks rather unlikely that the known actors were cooperating with the hacker(s). The fact that proves that most strongly is that they cared so less for P.R. and information. Someone wanting to cover up tracks will concentrate on letting things appear in the right light, instead of concentrating on a tedious puzzle game of piecing together the missing informations on the accounts and claims.


Disclaimer: I do not approve the hack or sympatise with the hacker(s) in any way.
These are the people which should be hunted and chased.

Luckily, you're in the minority. My guess is you're one of their sockpuppet accounts.

Cool, can I be a sockpuppet account too?
FWIW, scammer tag is not the solution here.

no, your post count is too high.

I won't even read through five pages of scapegoat-bashing.

1) Don't play with more than you are comfortable to lose
2) If any tag whatsoever would be grated at this early time, a "has been hacked" or "in dept" one is all I can see here.

Ente

At the very least bitocintalk.com should freeze all accounts of those involved with Bitcoinica before all the posts disappear.  If I am not mistaken though, even if the posts are deleted they are still stored in the database.

Considering the recent developments/facts a scammer tag now seems even more appropriate...

Yep - IMO, there should be scammer tags applied, and the accounts locked to prevent alteration of data.

Sadly this probably won't happen anytime soon... theymos sold eight ad slots to Zhoutong...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.20 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.20)

http://coinlab.com/investors


Has everyone been CLEARED?

Now... MtGox is selling out it's US and Canadian users... shouldn't anyone take notice?

Nothing to see here! Mt. Gox simply declared the Bitcoinica coins as assets. The new orders will simply put the coins back on the liability side of the ledger. Basic accounting, that's all. It all balances out in the long, long, long, long.. run.

Has there been any updates?

The second liquidator's report is due soon, which should update people on where things are at and any barriers to the progress of the liquidation.

Amir has started a thread talking about Bitcoinica and Patrick has chimed in saying that the MtGox intrusion wasn't due to the source code being leaked. It will be interesting to see whether they disclose enough information for criminal action to be taken against the intruder.

According to documents filed recently in the Cartmell action, Bitcoinica Consultancy is now in liquidation too.

There is now. And if Strateman and Taaki had had a scammer tag last spring, I wouldn't have been scammed.

Strateman locked me out of my Intersango account. I should imagine because he spent my bitcoins already. The bitcoins I need for a sick dog I rescued. The story is in my sig.

I'm not planning on suing, but on an arrest followed by confiscation and redistribution of stolen bitcoins (as bitcoins not fiat) from any of his enterprises the court decides might have been criminal.

Anyone who wants to help can email me whatever evidence they think might be good for getting a conviction  to..

i c e m a i d e n (number) z e r o (number) s e v e n at g m a i l dot you know what.

There is now? Have there been any court rulings in this case finally? Generally, I have no idea why bitcointalk, otherwise a great forum, is so slow in protecting its members against big shot scammers. I feel it could have something to do with affiliation and conferences and business relations. Not good.

No court rulings. I'm going for an arrest. I don't have time to wait. Anyone who feels similarly aggrieved, should, I think, be welcome to add to my initial complaint. This being a criminal matter, involving lots of nice money the state will be keen to get its hands on, I say we light the blue touchpaper, stand well back, then claim our property after forfeiture.

I think it was a serious misjudgment of Strateman's to hand someone such a clear-cut piece of evidence. You can argue all day about who might have been responsible for the Bitcoinica disaster, but appropriating my bitcoins from Intersango? That can only be one person. Who was also at the scene of some previous appropriations. Point out the pattern to a judge and Steve_bobs your uncle.. [1]

:)

[1] English term. "Bob's your uncle" = "job done".