|
Title: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 10, 2013, 03:37:01 PM Hello. I'm proposing that the shareholders immediately take control of BAKEWELL via shareholder motion, and:
1. appoint an interim CEO, 2. rerouting, refund, sell the rights to, or sell the actual, AVALON asics ordered by BAKEWELL 3. create and issue IAN BAKEWELL debt representing the two $4,000 mining rigs owned by BAKEWELL 4. distribute profits from these events to shareholders 5. shut down the company To be effective we need a shareholder motion to run appointing someone as the sole director of the company. We will need Ukyo's permission to run this motion. We need: ---> Someone must step up and volunteer to become the interim CEO and take control of the BAKEWELL account. ---> We then need to run a motion firing Ian and turning over all company asset to this new person (We need existing shareholders to request this, I will sign the request this as well since I now directly represent ownership of between 4.9% and 12.1% of the company (294 shares on BitFunder and a BMF claim for a possible further 432 shares). ---> The voted-in CEO needs to immediately contact AVALON with proof of the transfer (essentially, the result of the vote and/or Ukyo's signed statement regarding the matter). At the very least this will constitute proof that Ian has stolen money from the company which will be needed if anyone wants to go after him legally for the GPU mining rigs BAKEWELL owns, so I think we should take a shot at getting this resolved on our end ASAP. If no one volunteers for 48 hours I will do it. At least I'm a Canadian. I would prefer not to become interim CEO though. I am very busy with my own business and work IRL. We need someone to step up and volunteer here. We also need to immediately contact that guy who claimed to have met Ian in person. (I'm a little busy so someone please step up to the plate and link the info from one of Ian's old threads where someone claimed to have met him in person). Thanks. But FWIW I have a lot of (somewhat estranged) family out there in Northern Canada. It is not unfeasable for me to make some calls and ask/pay a distant cousin to drive down to Edmonton and check out a few addresses. It would save money on a PI. We will also need someone to contact Yifu and ask if it is theoretically possible, given the situation, to reroute the order to the new company address. That's how it should be presented, as that's what it is (a change of company address). So someone please step up to the plate and contact Yifu and ask him if we can do that so long as we can provide proof we run the company. This is important, we need volunteers to step up to the plate and get these things done within 24 hours. Post what you're going to help out with here and then go do it so we don't duplicate our efforts. If anyone asks what I did for this, it's the push and the idea/plan. But I can't get too involved because I run my own business and I work a lot IRL, so actually doing the whole interim CEO thing would be a bit much for me. Get involved, or you are basically kissing your money goodbye. If we get a small group together and start a collection plate for things like a private investigator and a lawyer / representation in small claims court, if you're not in the room when the deals are signed you are not in the deal and would have to go after him on your own. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 10, 2013, 03:47:46 PM I have sent the following letter to Yifu:
Dear Yifu; Due to Ian Bakewell's widely-acknowledged scam, stealing the bitcoins and hardware of his company (and admitting it) and then disappearing, shareholders are planning to hold a vote to fire Ian Bakewell as CEO and transfer the company to a new, interim CEO. Should this action occur, they will be able to provide proof of the shareholder motion approving this transfer, and I am sure Ukyo will be able to GPG sign a statement confirming the transfer. With this proof of change of company ownership, would it be possible to intercept Ian Bakewell's AVALON ASIC orders and reroute them to the new company address and/or simply refund the money? Please advise. I realize you might want to see something akin to a letter from a "real-world" lawyer, so please advise precisely what kind of information we need to provide to authorize the transfer and/or change of address. Thank you! This letter will be translated into Chinese and sent to Avalon's customer support again tomorrow. I of course live here so I can get the translation done and I will report the results of these lines of inquiry as responses are received. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Dalkore on April 10, 2013, 04:07:14 PM Shareholders,
I would be willing to step to do an orderly wind-down of the company. Also if a direct sales of the ASIC units (pending Yifu's approval) is not the only option, putting it with the rest of my personal and managed units is an option and then I can send dividends out. I will need a PM and then a Skype conference to go over the details so a scope can be nailed down to the last detail. I will also need an accurate accounting of what transpired at Bakewell so I know the history. Signed, Dalkore Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: iCEBREAKER on April 10, 2013, 06:28:36 PM Hello. I'm proposing that the shareholders immediately take control of BAKEWELL via shareholder motion, and: 1. appoint an interim CEO, 2. rerouting, refund, sell the rights to, or sell the actual, AVALON asics ordered by BAKEWELL 3. create and issue IAN BAKEWELL debt representing the two $4,000 mining rigs owned by BAKEWELL 4. distribute profits from these events to shareholders 5. shut down the company I second these motions, and move to draft TradeFortress for interim CEO. Also, we need a local victim of Ian's scam to get the Canadian BITCOIN POLICE on his ass. They never stop, until they've got their man. https://i.imgur.com/u9slLPL.jpg Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: tulkos on April 10, 2013, 11:42:13 PM I move to elect TradeFortress as interim CEO
I am currently holding 483 shares of BAKEWELL which I paid 65.6 BTC back in the day >:( My share purchase can be verified by admin though my PM's to Ian or though Ukyo on BitFunder Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 11, 2013, 12:08:39 AM Great work usagi!!
Great work everyone else here. This thing can work! I am currently holding 97 shares of Bakewell on Bitfunder. I add my total support to all these suggestions, and am very willing to donate to a legal fighting fund. TradeFortress would be my preferred choice for interim CEO as I don't know Dalkore so much. But I will fully support Dalkore, and applaud his generosity in making his offer to stand in, if TF is unwilling/ unable. Again, can fourd00rgtz manage the needed Canadian legal action? Now, let's hear some more support from the community and shareholders. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 11, 2013, 12:24:42 AM I can step up as the interim CEO, but would Avalon re-route the order? It's under Ian Bakewell's name, and this is a unincorporated company.
I don't hold any shares in BAKEWELL, but he does owe me around 100 BTC (not counting interest), and has borrowed a lot of coins and shares from other people. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 11, 2013, 01:48:44 AM Great stuff, TradeFortress.
Let's give it a try! As usagi suggests, we should first get support for your appointment as interim CEO, and take control of the BAKEWELL account. We then need to run a motion firing Ian and turning over all company asset to this new person. We need existing shareholders to request this. The voted-in CEO needs to immediately contact AVALON with proof of the transfer (essentially, the result of the vote and/or Ukyo's signed statement regarding the matter). I've sent out PMs to everyone who has posted in the Bakewell thread asking for support, along with other key Bitcoiners to spread the word. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: repentance on April 11, 2013, 02:09:25 AM I can step up as the interim CEO, but would Avalon re-route the order? It's under Ian Bakewell's name, and this is a unincorporated company. I don't hold any shares in BAKEWELL, but he does owe me around 100 BTC (not counting interest), and has borrowed a lot of coins and shares from other people. If this isn't a real company, then you really need to think about the legal liability to which your actions could be exposing you. What is the actual legal basis for taking control of BAKEWELL and its assets without a court order? If BAKEWELL is not a legitimate legal entity, it has no legal priority over any other creditors of Ian's and you could be creating a legal clusterfuck by trying to take control of assets for the exclusive benefit of BAKEWELL shareholders. Yifu should be extremely careful about accepting any claims to the Avalons and should get his own legal advice about the validity of such claims. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: iCEBREAKER on April 11, 2013, 02:39:27 AM I can step up as the interim CEO, but would Avalon re-route the order? It's under Ian Bakewell's name, and this is a unincorporated company. I don't hold any shares in BAKEWELL, but he does owe me around 100 BTC (not counting interest), and has borrowed a lot of coins and shares from other people. Given that we have Ian's docs, it should be easy to convince Avalon and/or DHS. I'll figure out how to transfer some BAKEWELL to you, so you'll be an Official Shareholder. Thanks for stepping up! Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 11, 2013, 02:42:36 AM I can step up as the interim CEO, but would Avalon re-route the order? It's under Ian Bakewell's name, and this is a unincorporated company. I don't hold any shares in BAKEWELL, but he does owe me around 100 BTC (not counting interest), and has borrowed a lot of coins and shares from other people. If this isn't a real company, then you really need to think about the legal liability to which your actions could be exposing you. What is the actual legal basis for taking control of BAKEWELL and its assets without a court order? If BAKEWELL is not a legitimate legal entity, it has no legal priority over any other creditors of Ian's and you could be creating a legal clusterfuck by trying to take control of assets for the exclusive benefit of BAKEWELL shareholders. Yifu should be extremely careful about accepting any claims to the Avalons and should get his own legal advice about the validity of such claims. Good question. And you're right -- you asked, "What is the actual legal basis...", which is a statement that you do not know. So you are absolutely right, you do not know. Here's your answer (minimized because it's irrelevant to this thread): Let me put it this way. There is all sorts of evidence all over the net and a lot of people. Ian Bakewell is well-known to have advertised that he will take people's money in exchange for running people's hardware. The proof is simple, the asset list on BitFunder is public. Here it is: BAKEWELL 85 1JLQoK9wd32AWShXmaR2NwKf3gm1gJSueG BAKEWELL 6 1Ga15RkdrBVeRWuCZghdfLHUQT5Coxp4T8 BAKEWELL 1 1EdCx9As3uLyZ9bKY473xvnAS6e35RUwKP BAKEWELL 60 1AW77W5keAyzvhdErgEgcjpSzfMASG2857 BAKEWELL 75 1nFe55ncihZfYXMH1dPBpSzkuqy9gJSmL BAKEWELL 230 1KbmvzUgXX1YZKkSNqdHC5stD6vt13Gopx BAKEWELL 1 17vPw1TVrYYXkWvgvFmwuzSQNBpyCH24R3 BAKEWELL 3 15ehPePXfYyuAHqjBdK5YJxXSB9Uep1a86 BAKEWELL 1 1HaKNzqBXA44tV7k7TZRaAuHTfPb6LaXf8 BAKEWELL 110 1LhhedZHAtYPRcCvNwSedbh335ZAgFMoFq BAKEWELL 82 133yWZHeRdS2hnqpZyv525kHoipAnnX6zb BAKEWELL 150 17oN3VWW5LmkCmBMQnwc6FZM4ezj7ZZWRp BAKEWELL 26 1KrxecCGj1PD458Lfd8xx54KmQm77tXzVA BAKEWELL 111 1LmqjDYwLWC8Bsb3nCG1uauLJQUdpSjYt3 BAKEWELL 300 1CGEgHZpCKMwwtVELK4vrMensvbGAV18sj BAKEWELL 1 14e8xhwqJBdJPquVFLEGWivodtWFyPMZE2 BAKEWELL 2 1K2qmHwxyZumsfWPWekrEwo62UzvxY6V9m BAKEWELL 730 1AET6JqduzJMjr5HzKM5cZFBcZZYA3dCVC BAKEWELL 300 19YuDb6QqhWugyC8LaGn99BSSPvMAs16FC BAKEWELL 194 13FfUmV2FktBuDmFTFBuRw9PtRU2mDG9Yg BAKEWELL 15 1KBeaY7JmWAMzj5YgU37EggBajsCLjPzZA BAKEWELL 3 1FundR66BhKJwyLYMzJxBfgLwVCi2YeTgG BAKEWELL 966 14KeZanmzhq5Nirx8zdt6SoD8rZDTAe9Hf BAKEWELL 483 1JpWLrVjivNUC7o2oPNxHmTFsJ21Bn5y7z BAKEWELL 1 17bruSwSkzwCqgGFjZ78Srizyy24eCKZF5 BAKEWELL 1 1AEJ5pgRtgxY8e4Qc8UaG7FGUGb6qKFE4F BAKEWELL 294 1usagi8WQJvnCoyV21XSZyUHhC6MzfksW BAKEWELL 6 1DNunhjBgtna9zSASBXbqBzF9yeYQzAqD7 BAKEWELL 50 12AF7WygbH6fnHeTB83FSZ5Fc1EkwBztpB BAKEWELL 1,123 1P8XSWnwWxQqLnR7QQVGbHHvmQiDUtXhZn BAKEWELL 97 1PAXbYKK4qEUZdGGyfYUiWwAyCm2QzRZZo BAKEWELL 10 168umnmHzx2pKucvvFyRwRHXvBUs21Sztz BAKEWELL 1 1AxQfy7PR7W5WVD8rWtyS1xMUspgFdayJ1 BAKEWELL 252 16wXi4n4hN8LRvvqoDuBVvN46DGKCJPpPF BAKEWELL 3 18G9hoa5FfnEdkPd5vkBDSzt33vWMSvS53 BAKEWELL 1 1BeHihfVba7qFFtPWSBR4kXRQ1GaXmTipS BAKEWELL 200 1B4feHRYPRjtt2U9fWh1eYg5UkZZXVhuky BAKEWELL 5 1J3BLqArVjc9xU2H3F6PUJ1woEEakDptae So as you see the proof is right there -- Ian took people's money and issued them shares which, he guaranteed, were worth hardware. Then he stole that hardware. The actual legal term is "theft by removal", if you're curious. Here are some of the ways in which a person can be guilty of theft by deception: A person commits theft if he obtains property of another by deception. A person deceives if he intentionally: (1) Creates or reinforces a false impression, including false impressions as to law, value, intention, or other state of mind; but deception as to a person's intention to perform a promise shall not be inferred from the fact alone that he did not subsequently perform the promise; or (2) Prevents another from acquiring information which would affect his judgment of a transaction; or (3) Fails to correct a false impression which the deceiver previously created or reinforced, or which the deceiver knows to be influencing another to whom he stands in a fiduciary or confidential relationship; or (4) Uses a credit card, charge plate, or any other instrument which purports to evidence an undertaking to pay for property or services delivered or rendered to or upon the order of a designated person or bearer (a) where such instrument has been stolen, forged, revoked, or canceled, or where for any other reason its use by the actor is unauthorized, or (b) where the actor does not have the intention and ability to meet all obligations to the issuer arising out of his use of the instrument. It should be obvious to you what the actual legal basis is by now, if not I advise you to do what we are going to do: consult with a lawyer. IANAL so asking me what the actual legal basis would be is likely a waste of your time. Back to business, I concurr with TradeFortress over Daklore for several reasons; one, he is an asset issuer on the same exchange, two, he's shrugged off scam accusation threads before, three, it fits with the kind of investment he runs (shares in BAKEWELL can be converted to BTCINVEST if shareholders choose to keep the ASICs as they're just another kind of investment) et cetera. I just think he's a perfect fit. Ok so I haven't heard back from Yifu yet, but as I said I am getting the letter translated into Chinese and I will try to contact them more directly later today. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: fourd00rgtz on April 11, 2013, 02:52:06 AM Again, can fourd00rgtz manage the needed Canadian legal action? Didn't really offer, mostly because I agree with the quote below. Nothing is going to be legaly enforcable, but the avalons and gaming rigs should be repurposed for the "company" if possible. Just mentioned that I drive through Edmonton to get to work... Not that I wanted to be the sole plaintiff. But I'll put my 300 shares behind TradeFortress for CEO. If this isn't a real company, then you really need to think about the legal liability to which your actions could be exposing you. What is the actual legal basis for taking control of BAKEWELL and its assets without a court order? If BAKEWELL is not a legitimate legal entity, it has no legal priority over any other creditors of Ian's and you could be creating a legal clusterfuck by trying to take control of assets for the exclusive benefit of BAKEWELL shareholders. Yifu should be extremely careful about accepting any claims to the Avalons and should get his own legal advice about the validity of such claims. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: repentance on April 11, 2013, 03:01:24 AM usagi, theft is a criminal matter and the remedies to theft cannot be found in shareholder motions or trying to take control of a pretend company. Even if you start looking at breaches of contract and torts like conversion, you still have the problem that BAKEWELL is only a pretend company. In reality, Ian is operating as a sole trader and no amount of shareholder votes can change that or give you the legal authority to seize control of his assets (and they're his assets, not BAKEWELL's, unless BAKEWELL is a separate legal entity).
Unless BAKEWELL is a legitimate company which has a separate legal existence to Ian himself, then you're all just personal creditors of Ian and have no superior legal standing to any of his other creditors (and apparently he has quite a few). above all people, you should understand that as shareholders in SILVER:TU are effectively in the same situation. Why should Ian's other creditors not try to block you from actions which would see BAKEWELL shareholders benefit at their expense when your legal claim to any of Ian's assets is not superior to theirs? If you take control of assets to which you have no valid legal claim, you're the ones who may find yourselves guilty of theft or conversion. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Thursday on April 11, 2013, 03:08:46 AM Where is this Ian Bakewell cunt? Why hasn't someone broke both of his legs yet? Surely there's a member within a few miles radius of him.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Franktank on April 11, 2013, 03:14:23 AM Where is this Ian Bakewell cunt? Why hasn't someone broke both of his legs yet? Surely there's a member within a few miles radius of him. While I have not invested into his venture, the last thing the BTC community needs is the general public discovering that a few individuals "go medieval on his ass" for his schemes. If you want him to get his just desserts, please do it as civilized human beings. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 11, 2013, 03:28:54 AM I'm currently holding 300 BAKEWELL.
Ian also owes me BTC3.0 from a btcJam loan. 1) TradeFortress as CEO is a good idea. 2) However, I think we should give Ian a chance to absolve himself of at least some portion of debt here. He can do that by voluntarily turning over the ASICs and FPGA miners to this body. We can work out details of when and how on the FPGAs. The ASICs must be signed over right away. I believe that Ian was acting in good faith initially, however his youth and inexperience in business and world markets betrayed him. So he ran. I think that given the chance to clear his name, he may. My initial reason for investing in BAKEWELL was due to Ian's past performance and the fact of his youth. I believe he wants the best for his life ahead and will do what's needed to make it a good one. If we stomp on him here, we create a company known for that and we may destroy a life that's worth saving. 3) BAKEWELL (or whatever it becomes) will need some interim funding to work with. I recommend another small and separate preferred share be created. Those who can, and already have shares in BAKEWELL, can buy it. It will carry an early repayment clause, and a small coupon, say 1 - 5%. Target whatever small sum is needed to make things happen. A reasonable (1-3%?) portion of the shares of this should be given to the CEO as payment for his services. 4) How can I personally help? My advantages: wide ranging experience in hardware, software and business, available office space, and I live in what is one of the lowest power cost regions in the world at $0.06 - $0.08 / Kwh. My disadvantage: I don't have time. That's why I invest in other people. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 11, 2013, 03:29:24 AM usagi, theft is a criminal matter and the remedies to theft cannot be found in shareholder motions or trying to take control of a pretend company. Even if you start looking at breaches of contract and torts like conversion, you still have the problem that BAKEWELL is only a pretend company. In reality, Ian is operating as a sole trader and no amount of shareholder votes can change that or give you the legal authority to seize control of his assets (and they're his assets, not BAKEWELL's, unless BAKEWELL is a separate legal entity). Unless BAKEWELL is a legitimate company which has a separate legal existence to Ian himself, then you're all just personal creditors of Ian and have no superior legal standing to any of his other creditors (and apparently he has quite a few). above all people, you should understand that as shareholders in SILVER:TU are effectively in the same situation. Why should Ian's other creditors not try to block you from actions which would see BAKEWELL shareholders benefit at their expense when your legal claim to any of Ian's assets is not superior to theirs? If you take control of assets to which you have no valid legal claim, you're the ones who may find yourselves guilty of theft or conversion. Just trying to avoid this: Where is this Ian Bakewell cunt? Why hasn't someone broke both of his legs yet? Surely there's a member within a few miles radius of him. As you see we need to try to get this resolved legally quickly. We do not need your faux legal opinion trying to discourage people from going after him legally. Further this discussion is of immense value because "other people have better ideas"; MikeMark for example had the excellent idea of asking Ian to do the right thing. Maybe he will. We can definitely try that. The important thing is we need to get together and do the right thing. Yes I realize there are ISSUES with going after Ian legally but they may not be insurmountable if we act quickly and as a community. Do yourself and the BAKEWELL shareholders a treat and stay out of our way. If it doesn't work legally, then we will learn why not, and we will learn how to structure investments and so forth in the future so we do not encounter the same legal impasse a second time. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 11, 2013, 03:57:41 AM I support usagi's initiative and the decision to name TradeFortress interim CEO of BAKEWELL. I hold 252 shares of BAKEWELL (4.2%).
I also support the plan to have the avalon asics rerouted to TradeFortress. We should be hashing with those asap! I'm optimistic that Avalon will validate our claim. It needs to be heavily publicized that a group of bitfunder shareholders are going after scammer Ian Bakewell. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 11, 2013, 04:01:51 AM I can step up as the interim CEO, but would Avalon re-route the order? It's under Ian Bakewell's name, and this is a unincorporated company. I don't hold any shares in BAKEWELL, but he does owe me around 100 BTC (not counting interest), and has borrowed a lot of coins and shares from other people. Given that we have Ian's docs, it should be easy to convince Avalon and/or DHS. I'll figure out how to transfer some BAKEWELL to you, so you'll be an Official Shareholder. Thanks for stepping up! How many shares do you have? I'm making a list so we can approach Ukyo with sufficient authorization/power to request the motion. 294 usagi 483 tulkos 97 strello ??? iCEBREAKER 300 fourd00rgtz 300 MikeMark 252 NameFace ---- 1726 28.77% Given iCEBREAKER's shares we should have 30%, enough representation to request a motion already, but any shareholders that haven't spoken up please do so now. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: fourd00rgtz on April 11, 2013, 04:45:49 AM http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863 (http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863)
Link to the Bitfunder Asset list for BAKEWELL, strange its 21 shares short (5979 of 6000) and it shows that there was 6000 when he last paid a dividend. Its a google docs spreadsheet and has % thrown in. We need Mr./Mrs. 1123/966/730 shares to speak up that's 47% in those 3 people. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: burnside on April 11, 2013, 04:48:23 AM http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863 (http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863) Link to the Bitfunder Asset list for BAKEWELL, strange its 21 shares short (5979 of 6000) and it shows that there was 6000 when he last paid a dividend. Its a google docs spreadsheet and has % thrown in. We need Mr./Mrs. 1123/966/730 shares to speak up that's 47% in those 3 people. Maybe he bought some back for a friend? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Blazr on April 11, 2013, 04:50:07 AM This guy ended up being a scammer? Wow, we exchanged PM's about a very sizable loan before, luckily I dodged the bullet.
Wish you guys the best of luck. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 11, 2013, 05:06:26 AM http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863 (http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863) Link to the Bitfunder Asset list for BAKEWELL, strange its 21 shares short (5979 of 6000) and it shows that there was 6000 when he last paid a dividend. Its a google docs spreadsheet and has % thrown in. We need Mr./Mrs. 1123/966/730 shares to speak up that's 47% in those 3 people. Maybe he bought some back for a friend? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 11, 2013, 05:35:38 AM http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863 (http://www1.datafilehost.com/d/afdd7863) Could some of those be Ian's shares? He held 2 categories of shares.We need Mr./Mrs. 1123/966/730 shares to speak up that's 47% in those 3 people. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: niko on April 11, 2013, 06:13:15 AM I am the guy who met Ian in person (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1183917#msg1183917) in September 2012, after seeing his BAKEWELL anouncement. At the time all my funds were tied up, so this meetup was mostly an attempt to make sure he is for real - and yes, he was the person from the images he posted.
Few weeks later I did manage to come up with 30 coins, and decided to buy in. GLBSE collapsed. Ian kept hashing with the two rigs. He then abruptly anounced how we should "consider BAKEWELL a loss". I did not like the sound of it. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=129740.0) He also did not respond to my PMs, emails, and telephone contacts. I did not like that either. While I was too apologetic when he finally acknowledged the previous receipt of GLBSE data, I was left with the bad taste which only grew worse over days. At some point, Ian voted with growth and maintenance shares, and stubbornly defended the idiocy of doing so. That's where I had enough. As a matter of principle, I try not to do business with people I dislike, even if it is or may be profitable. I sold all my shares - at approximately a 50% loss - and quit wasting time on Ian. In retrospect, it was one good decision I made. As I have no more direct interest in this matter, I am simply writing to share my unqualified opinion about actions of shareholders and lenders whose assets Ian ran away with. There is no company to go after. There is only Ian, and his written (and archived, thanks to Theymos) commitments. What he seems to be doing is an indictable offence in Canada. I agree with repentance here. This is a criminal matter, and should be dealt with accordingly. Finally, in case Ian reads this - I urge him to carefully reconsider the direction he took. There still is a little bit of time left for a U-turn. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 11, 2013, 06:58:39 AM This needs to be dealt with by going to the police - not by share-holder motions on a company that has no legal existence.
Of the two Avalons, one was paid for by a loan to the company - which still hasn't been discharged in full. So from ANY perspective the shareholders do not have clear title to that even if it were accepted that the "company" was a legal person. There's 0% chance Yifu will intervene. He'd expose himself and his company to risk for no benefit and set a precedent whereby he'd end up inundated with people claiming Avalon X was paid for with their money so should be sent to them. He refused to intervene in one such dispute over a loan before. But if you DO go ahead with this, you could also consider sending a letter to BFL (no translation neeed) and see if they'll do anything about the preordered hardware for usagi's company BMF which has still not accounted for for all the hardware it claimed to have before GLBSE closed. That company also deleted all posts, won't respond (thread is locked), won't provide updated information, refuses to pay out funds to shareholders and has made promises (repaying all NYAN.A investors in full) that the rise in BTC price has made unlikely ever to be fulfilled. Rather than attemtion-whoring here with dodgy proposals (you're asking Yifu to break a contract made with Ian Bakewell - without a court order he CAN'T legally confiscate the Avalons), usagi would be better served spending the time finally sorting out the finances of his own companies which have languished without attention since January. Yes - we GET that you want to list them so you can buy the shares back for cheap by forcing investors into submission by never doing anything, failing to update accounts and withholding their money. Whining about Bakewell not paying his investors/honouring his promises is the ultimate in hypocrisy as you're doing precisely the same to your own ones. Or is there somewhere a schedule of how/when you'll meet your promise to refund NYAN.A investors in full? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Puppet on April 11, 2013, 07:17:25 AM This needs to be dealt with by going to the police - not by share-holder motions on a company that has no legal existence. Of the two Avalons, one was paid for by a loan to the company - which still hasn't been discharged in full. So from ANY perspective the shareholders do not have clear title to that even if it were accepted that the "company" was a legal person. There's 0% chance Yifu will intervene. He'd expose himself and his company to risk for no benefit and set a precedent whereby he'd end up inundated with people claiming Avalon X was paid for with their money so should be sent to them. He refused to intervene in one such dispute over a loan before. But if you DO go ahead with this, you could also consider sending a letter to BFL (no translation neeed) and see if they'll do anything about the preordered hardware for usagi's company BMF which has still not accounted for for all the hardware it claimed to have before GLBSE closed. That company also deleted all posts, won't respond (thread is locked), won't provide updated information, refuses to pay out funds to shareholders and has made promises (repaying all NYAN.A investors in full) that the rise in BTC price has made unlikely ever to be fulfilled. Rather than attemtion-whoring here with dodgy proposals (you're asking Yifu to break a contract made with Ian Bakewell - without a court order he CAN'T legally confiscate the Avalons), usagi would be better served spending the time finally sorting out the finances of his own companies which have languished without attention since January. Yes - we GET that you want to list them so you can buy the shares back for cheap by forcing investors into submission by never doing anything, failing to update accounts and withholding their money. Whining about Bakewell not paying his investors/honouring his promises is the ultimate in hypocrisy as you're doing precisely the same to your own ones. Or is there somewhere a schedule of how/when you'll meet your promise to refund NYAN.A investors in full? The voice of reason. +10. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: wisard on April 11, 2013, 07:20:39 AM I own 1123 shares. I back this.
I don't mind either TradeFortress or Dalkore heading this. I would prefer mining over selling. But I will go with whatever the decision made by them is. I will also gift a few of my shares as incentive if Avalon orders does get transferred (this could be used to pay off the outstanding loan that was taken for the 2nd Avalon - if we know who the loan giver is. This could also be used to cover transportation costs that arise if anyone is willing to travel.) Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 11, 2013, 09:04:36 AM Great stuff everyone!
I'm really proud of the almost exclusively positive rational discussion developing in this thread. It's a pity about the one suggestion of violence so far, but I can understand the genuine anger behind his outburst. As most will agree, we don't need violence here. I realise that any kind of recovery at all a very long shot, but I feel there's a real opportunity to score some great publicity here as it's such an open scam. Bakewell has posted far too much personal info to run away anonymously, so we can use his online personality to create a media Bitcoin Bogeyman. The potential for positive Bitcoin coverage- something is being done about the scammers at last- as well as a good human interest news story is far to good an opportunity to let slip. Great propaganda value here. I'm gently working on trying to get the story out as widely and creatively as I can, in breaks from being really sick just now. This is becoming a fine example of how, with some cool heads and a handful of passion, the immensely diverse Bitcoin community can pull together and make a real positive change in the world. Real democratic non-violent self policing by mutual agreement. Great to see new thinking coming in too, thanks for the suggestion of giving him a last chance, MikeMark. And finally, as usual, Deprived is absolutely correct in his analysis. This must be officially reported to the Canadian authorities as soon as possible. Good luck all! strello Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 11, 2013, 10:13:51 AM Just some advice on reporting it to the police.
DON'T wander into your local Police station with nothing planned or prepared then proceed to totally confuse whoever you speak to. DO prepare a full written summary of what happened first - referencing either evidence or where evidence could be obtained from. My recommendation would be that the initial report be from someone who gave him a simple loan. That's far easier to explain than trying to explain what being a Bakewell shareholder means. The key of the initial report is to get an investigation opened - then all the other loans/shorts/shares etc can get added in. To get an investigation opened the main thing you need to convince them of is that there' a reasonable prospect of a conviction at the end of it. That definitely IS the case here - but it's easy to fail to make that clear if you don't plan in advance and end up waffling on about irreleavnt things rather than hammering home that the evidence does exist/is recoverable and that there's no doubt over the identity of the perpetrator. Don't delay giving 2nd chances / last chances etc. Some evidence only has a limited life-span (e.g. ISP logs of allocated IP addresses) and you really want the Police involved BEFORE the Avalons arrive - so that they can be seized by the Police on arrival then disposed of appropriately at the end of their investigation. It may be that Ian's lawyer (he'd have one by then) may advise him to turn the Avalon over to someone continuing to operate Bakewell. Remember failing to repay the loans isn't necessarily criminal, stealing the investors' computers definitely is - and once Police involvement forces him to get a lawyer he'll have that explained to him. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 11, 2013, 10:44:28 AM And finally, as usual, Deprived is absolutely correct in his analysis. This must be officially reported to the Canadian authorities as soon as possible. Don't listen to Deprived/Puppet or Repentance because they are being paid by MPOE-PR to try and turn this into an issue about me and BMF/etc. Back to business, while we may need to end up going to the police that is not the path I am proposing here, and unfortunately for Puppet/Deprived/etc. they will lose this round. We have shareholder support now to put TradeFortress in and try to reclaim the Avalons. That is step one. We may fail, that's fine, but I think we should try. We also have Niko on board with us now, so the next thing (step two) is to try to contact Ian and ask him if he won't come back and try to work things out. Not going to the police, which should be a last resort IMO. The last thing you want to do is to go to the police without giving Ian a chance. If you go to the police the hardware will get confiscated and you will likely never see any money or hardware returned. We need to contact Ian and talk some sense into him. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 11, 2013, 11:00:57 AM And finally, as usual, Deprived is absolutely correct in his analysis. This must be officially reported to the Canadian authorities as soon as possible. Don't listen to Deprived/Puppet or Repentance because they are being paid by MPOE-PR to try and turn this into an issue about me and BMF/etc. Back to business, while we may need to end up going to the police that is not the path I am proposing here, and unfortunately for Puppet/Deprived/etc. they will lose this round. We have shareholder support now to put TradeFortress in and try to reclaim the Avalons. That is step one. We may fail, that's fine, but I think we should try. We also have Niko on board with us now, so the next thing (step two) is to try to contact Ian and ask him if he won't come back and try to work things out. Not going to the police, which should be a last resort IMO. The last thing you want to do is to go to the police without giving Ian a chance. If you go to the police the hardware will get confiscated and you will likely never see any money or hardware returned. We need to contact Ian and talk some sense into him. Certainly no harm in contacting Ian - just don't let him stall you for too long. Would have thought contacting him would have been done before even making forum threads tbh (you phoned him up before after all). If you want to waste your time contacting Avalon then knock yourself out - just don't be surprised when the answer ie either "No", "I need a court order" or "Please provide me contact details for a Police Officer who can confirm these were purchased with stolen funds". If you go to the police then yes, all hardware would be seized. But if Ian isn't cooperating then it's better for the hardware to be with the police than with Ian - as the Police won't sell if off for cheap before you can get a court order or reach agreement for possession of it. I'm not being paid by anyone to say anything btw. I ONCE received an unsolicited payment from MPOE-PR (last year I think) that wasn't tied to any specific post I'd made and had no strings attached. Disagree with my agenda by all means - but at least accept it's my OWN agenda not someone else's. And I'd keep all mention of BMF etc to their own thread - except you always either delete or lock threads about your own companies. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Peter Lambert on April 11, 2013, 12:50:55 PM usagi, theft is a criminal matter and the remedies to theft cannot be found in shareholder motions or trying to take control of a pretend company. Even if you start looking at breaches of contract and torts like conversion, you still have the problem that BAKEWELL is only a pretend company. In reality, Ian is operating as a sole trader and no amount of shareholder votes can change that or give you the legal authority to seize control of his assets (and they're his assets, not BAKEWELL's, unless BAKEWELL is a separate legal entity). I was selling off my holdings, I currently hold just 3 shares, so I don't have much at stake here, but here are my thoughts: I think I agree with Repentance here. There is no legal jurisdiction that will acknowledge BAKEWELL as a company, If he lives in Canada we will probably have to work under Canadian Law. My suggestion is to try to convince the court that he owes us some amount of Canadian Dollars based on the conversion rate of bitcoins. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 11, 2013, 02:17:56 PM I've contacted Ian several times over email and skype in recent weeks to request he pay me back. He hasn't gotten back to me.
I recently let him know an initiative is starting against him, still no reply. Deprived, Puppet, and Repentance do seem like they may have another agenda posting on this thread, but I still appreciate their input. I too have been scammed out of 1 BTC by usagi re: BMF, but at least we are in communication about it, and I don't see how that pertains to this. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 11, 2013, 02:44:15 PM Please can we all try to stay on topic and focussed on the Bakewell question. Let's keep inter personal issues out of this thread.
We've miraculously got this ball rolling, and need to keep it going. I think, according to nameface's post, a good attempt has been made to contact Ian Bakewell. Perhaps TradeFortress should also make an "official" attempt. I'm sure we need to follow up on the Canadian legal approach. The shareholder takeover move is off the wall and has a very small chance of any real success, but in my opinion could well be the deal breaker. I think it's the little spark of genius that might get a lot of people on our side. And we need more publicity. Can anyone do the social media stuff- reddit, twitter, facebook, second life and all those other buzzwords I have no idea about? Can't someone just start posting the word about this anywhere they can? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 11, 2013, 03:05:42 PM I think, according to nameface's post, a good attempt has been made to contact Ian Bakewell. Perhaps TradeFortress should also make an "official" attempt. I wouldn't characterize my recent attempts to make contact as official. They don't pertain to this initiative.It's just a few correspondences that amount to: "Hey man, what the hell, give me my money". But I'll definitely provide testimony to the police or other arbiters, and provide the records I have. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Evolvex on April 12, 2013, 01:39:30 AM I have 111 shares, I vote to let you appoint tradefortress as ceo, and my thanks goes out to all who are able and have got the ball rolling.
I think a peaceful and fair solution to everyone should be looked for regardless, and if all else fails, we go to the police and put him in the hot water. As was pointed out, this could be good media coverage for bitcoin, "bitcoiners deal out bitcoin justice to scammer"....love it. I'd be happy to sell my shares depending on price, pm me with me offers (I dont get to check here much so may take a while to reply). Cheers again. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 12, 2013, 03:44:39 PM Shareholder update: The following shareholders want a motion run to give the CEO seat to TradeFortress. This is the right of the shareholders.
294 usagi 483 tulkos 97 strello unk. iCEBREAKER 300 fourd00rgtz 300 MikeMark 252 NameFace 1123 wisard 111 Evolvex 730 Razcnah ---- 3690 61.5% The motion would still need to be run to make it official. Haven't heard anything from Ukyo yet. I don't have time to pursue this anymore because I have some extra hours at my job recently so someone else will need to take the mantle. I've done what I set out to do (get the ball rolling) now's the time for the whole 'step up and do your part' thing. Someone needs to contact the relevant people (and police if necessary) and what not. Good luck! Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Dalkore on April 12, 2013, 07:17:38 PM Thank you for your consideration. If TradeFortress does not accept and can not execute these duties, please keep me in mind as a backup candidate. The offer is also open if you don't want to liquidate the unit but instead put it into a management service and send out income.
It is good to see you guys organize, be proactive and try and make the best of this bad situation. -Dalkore Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 12, 2013, 07:31:40 PM Who has a better relationship with Avalon? Who wants it more? I'll vote with the majority.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: iCEBREAKER on April 12, 2013, 09:25:07 PM The motion would still need to be run to make it official. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: tolan77 on April 12, 2013, 11:11:36 PM I own a measly 75 shares of Bakewell on bitfunder I will definitely support a motion to make TradeFortress or Dalkore the new CEO of BAKEWELL if Ian never replies back. However if that doesn't make any headway or is not possible we should definitely be going to the police and try to get him in legal trouble and at least make sure he doesn't get two free avalons out of his scam. It will be an interesting day when a someone is finally convicted of a bitcoin related scam/theft.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 12, 2013, 11:40:10 PM What I think:
There isn't any chance at getting the Avalons shipped to someone other than Ian Bakewell. Yifu/Avalon is not going to do it, it's under his name and maybe we have a slight shot if he was scammed, but the 2 Avalons are going to him. Going after him through the police and the legal system (for the loans) is the way to go. In addition, we need to ruin his reputation - wonder if a mod would be willing to change this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98764.0 to "SCAMMER: Ian Bakewell" as it is the #2 result in google for his name already. Voting a new CEO isn't going to do anything. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: iCEBREAKER on April 13, 2013, 12:07:30 AM Ooh, I know. We could call his parents and tattle.
Just threatening to grass him up might do the trick, unless he's already in Thailand with pirate. Quote "Hello? Mrs. Bakewell? This is the internet. Sorry to bother you, but Ian's been a very naughty little scammer and we thought you should know." Quote https://i.imgur.com/uawygFJ.jpg "Oh dear!" Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: DiabloD3 on April 13, 2013, 12:58:39 AM Usagi, you do realize what you're trying to do to bakewell is no different than what nefario tried to do to DMC, right?
Pursue things legally, and since this none of you have a legal contract with Ian, there is not much you can do legally. Consider this a learning experience and move on. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 13, 2013, 01:41:36 AM we need to ruin his reputation - wonder if a mod would be willing to change this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98764.0 to "SCAMMER: Ian Bakewell" as it is the #2 result in google for his name already. +1Voting a new CEO isn't going to do anything. Also, should we open this discussion up to more people in a new thread in Bitcoin Forum > Bitcoin > Bitcoin Discussion? Because I think we need more opinions, and this is really a topic of interest for everyone. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 13, 2013, 03:06:27 AM What I think: There isn't any chance at getting the Avalons shipped to someone other than Ian Bakewell. Yifu/Avalon is not going to do it, it's under his name and maybe we have a slight shot if he was scammed, but the 2 Avalons are going to him. Going after him through the police and the legal system (for the loans) is the way to go. In addition, we need to ruin his reputation - wonder if a mod would be willing to change this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98764.0 to "SCAMMER: Ian Bakewell" as it is the #2 result in google for his name already. Voting a new CEO isn't going to do anything. The only thing creating a CEO does is create the person who executes the will of this body. Anything that gets done will still need to be done IRL. Someone will almost certainly need to meet face to face with Ian in order to show the seriousness here. Before that can be done, we should fully understand the legal standing. We all have a belief that we have been defrauded. There is always a basic choice, take action ourselves, or take action by calling upon an institution created for the purpose. Institutions have rules or laws that must be followed. Our question is now, which ones have willingness, ability and authority to help us? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: zapeta on April 13, 2013, 05:07:29 AM I no longer hold any shares, but I lost over 99% of what I invested with him. I support your actions in trying to recover funds...best of luck.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 13, 2013, 06:32:41 AM Great dialogue this morning!
We need to keep this moving. TradeFortress seems to be reluctant to act on anything but the legal approach- shall we ask Dalkore to front it. I think we need a spokesperson to continue trying to block the Avalon shipment, try to get some response out of Ukyo at Bitfunder, and generally have an overview and keep all these strategies alive. And to pull together a strategy for how to deal with any positive results from this. What I propose in the meantime is that we agree that the current list of Shareholders: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=172471.msg1819404#msg1819404 can independently continue any of these strategies in the name of, and with the implicit agreement of the Shareholder group. Nameface, can you start this new thread in discussions, it's a great idea. We need more publicity and input. Niko and fourdoorgtz, you seem to be our only Canadians. Can't one of you prepare a simple "dollar value" complaint- he's stolen our money to buy $4000 computers, which we own and want seized, run away from loans amounting to maybe as much as $100K, and has ordered more equipment with our stolen money, which we really want to block from reaching him. And approach the Edmonton police, and at least get a police complaint started, in the name of the Bakewell Shareholders. Here's good advice from Deprived: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=172471.msg1802432#msg1802432 Yes, iCEBREAKER, I think it's a great idea to get news of the scumbag's ideas of conducting his business "in a more transparent, ethical, and timely manner"* out in the world, and especially to friends, if any, and family. He deserves public shaming. And we need have a bit more fun and get some publicity. *https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1178842#msg1178842 Many of us, for all sorts of very good reasons, have an ambivalent trust relationship with "the law" and the Financial Machine. Certainly, that's why I'm in Bitcoin. But, hell, this slimebag has ripped us off for a significant amount of real money. Why can't we play this one out by being smart for once and acting as decent human beings. Find a way to organically organise ourselves at least enough to keep this ball rolling. Appeal to other decent people at Bitfunder, Avalon and out in the world, and try to give justice a chance to prevail by setting an example of mutual cooperation, rather than the traditional threats of legal violence and state-controlled enforcement. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: nameface on April 13, 2013, 01:04:46 PM I'm also Canadian. I live near Toronto, on the other side of the country.
I'm connected to Yifu Guo on linkedin. I'll msg him next week to request a phone call to inform him about our situation. Can we rehash the most important details that we're all on board with? We want to do three things: A - Sue Ian for stealing loans, re: BTCJAM B - Sue Ian for stealing rigs, re: BAKEWELL asset C - Reroute asics to BAKEWELLL shareholders Correct? I'm slightly concerned that if we take over BAKEWELL, re: the motion, that we will be actionable. But if we have such a motion passed on paper, I don't see how Avalon could be actionable for sending the asics to us. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 13, 2013, 01:06:31 PM C is not going to happen.. Ian Bakewell has an order with Avalon, that is all Yifu is concerned about. Perhaps he would act differently if he lost coins to Ian Bakewell.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 13, 2013, 01:32:03 PM I'm slightly concerned that if we take over BAKEWELL, re: the motion, that we will be actionable. But if we have such a motion passed on paper, I don't see how Avalon could be actionable for sending the asics to us. Where you run into an (obvious if you look at it logically) problem is that you're trying to claim two entirely contradictory things:1. That Bakewell (company) is the same thing as Bakewell (individual) - i.e. that it's Ian trading as the company. You have to claim this to have an entitlement to the Avalons as they were ordered in his name. 2. That Bakewell (company) is entirely seperate to Bakewell (individual) - you have to claim this for any sort of shareholder motion to have any meaning or for anyone other than Ian to be able to act on behalf of the company. If you want to claim that the company is an entity beyond Ian Bakewell personally trading then you immediately cease to have any right to approach Avalon - as their contract was with the individual. Whilst if you say Bakewell was synonymous with Ian personally then shareholders can't pass any motions on its behalf. The situation would be (slightly) different if the Avalon's had been ordered in a company name but they weren't. If A (Avalon) owes B (Ian Bakewell) and B owes C (shareholders) and B defaults on their obligation to C then C has no direct right to anything A owes B. If A gives stuff to C then they have NOT fulfilled their obligation to B - and B then has a claim against them, regardless of the merits of C's claim against B. Which is (partly) why Avalon won't get involved. There's loads of other reasons why they shouldn't get involved anyway - but that's the most glaringly obvious one. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 13, 2013, 06:43:46 PM I'm slightly concerned that if we take over BAKEWELL, re: the motion, that we will be actionable. But if we have such a motion passed on paper, I don't see how Avalon could be actionable for sending the asics to us. Where you run into an (obvious if you look at it logically) problem is that you're trying to claim two entirely contradictory things:1. That Bakewell (company) is the same thing as Bakewell (individual) - i.e. that it's Ian trading as the company. You have to claim this to have an entitlement to the Avalons as they were ordered in his name. 2. That Bakewell (company) is entirely seperate to Bakewell (individual) - you have to claim this for any sort of shareholder motion to have any meaning or for anyone other than Ian to be able to act on behalf of the company. If you want to claim that the company is an entity beyond Ian Bakewell personally trading then you immediately cease to have any right to approach Avalon - as their contract was with the individual. Whilst if you say Bakewell was synonymous with Ian personally then shareholders can't pass any motions on its behalf. The situation would be (slightly) different if the Avalon's had been ordered in a company name but they weren't. If A (Avalon) owes B (Ian Bakewell) and B owes C (shareholders) and B defaults on their obligation to C then C has no direct right to anything A owes B. If A gives stuff to C then they have NOT fulfilled their obligation to B - and B then has a claim against them, regardless of the merits of C's claim against B. Which is (partly) why Avalon won't get involved. There's loads of other reasons why they shouldn't get involved anyway - but that's the most glaringly obvious one. I think the public record (in the original BAKEWELL thread) shows that Ian was acting according to 1. In other words Ian was given money by those who were interested in seeing a profit from BAKEWELL in the form of a dividend from the mining operations. Ian asked for funds specifically to purchase equipment for those who bought shares (portions of ownership of) in that equipment and it's produce. His offer is/was to care for the equipment and see to it that the profit would be distributed properly. Shareholder votes and all the legalistic jargon aside, the reality is that we here have a common cause and proof to back up a claim. The reason the legal formation of companies was created was to formalize the records that constitute claims. Here, there is a record of the decisions by all involved to bring us to the point of this claim. The question now is who will support this claim? It would be best if Ian himself supported our claim. If he will not, our next best choice is for Avalon to support our claim. After that, our choices become poorer, with less reclaimed at the end after longer periods of time. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 13, 2013, 07:33:32 PM Time really is the problem we have. In order for there to be a good chance of recouping loss, the equipment needs to be put to work as soon as it arrives. As time goes on the profit from mining is reduced. These days it is dropping fairly fast.
That's also one of the reasons I'd like to see Ian actually come forward to work this out. We really need an opinion from a lawyer or judge on this regarding the possibilities, time frame, and the proper action. Who has contacts in the proper or related jurisdiction? Also, do we have on record anywhere that Ian agreed to internet arbitration in the event of disagreement? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 13, 2013, 08:29:14 PM Nice work, MikeMark.
I completely agree that evidence in the original thread that Ian announced this offering as a company with actual stock shares, in which the investors (shareholders) own a piece of the company, and it's equipment, current and on order, strongly supports our case that we do actually own the Bakewell equipment. So, does anyone understand how this legal process might work, or even how to get it started? So, nameface, I think that we should be focussing on going after Ian Bakewell as operator of the BAKEWELL company which essentially we own, for all assets we can possibly recover. Also I've posted a long, rambling and personal summary of the whole sad story in Discussions, mostly aimed at the outside world, hoping that the press etc might pick it up. I've locked it in an attempt to keep any useful discussion focussed here. Please feel free to link to it if you don't think it's too stupid and idealistic, which I certainly do, but the occasional rant makes me happy. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 13, 2013, 08:38:48 PM I think the public record (in the original BAKEWELL thread) shows that Ian was acting according to 1. In other words Ian was given money by those who were interested in seeing a profit from BAKEWELL in the form of a dividend from the mining operations. Ian asked for funds specifically to purchase equipment for those who bought shares (portions of ownership of) in that equipment and it's produce. His offer is/was to care for the equipment and see to it that the profit would be distributed properly. Shareholder votes and all the legalistic jargon aside, the reality is that we here have a common cause and proof to back up a claim. The reason the legal formation of companies was created was to formalize the records that constitute claims. Here, there is a record of the decisions by all involved to bring us to the point of this claim. The question now is who will support this claim? What you seem to miss is that Avalon is NOT a pretend company that only exists as an entity in a thread on a forum. It's a company operating in the real world. Real-world companies DON'T take it upon themselves to decide what has and hasn't been proven in disputes between others. They rely on a legal system and law-enforcement to give them directions in those circumstances. And aside from those issues do we really want to say it's OK for a company to break a deal they made because THEY decide their customer wronged someone else? Should ALL companies in Bitcoin-land start breaking contracts whenever they decide the other party owes money to someone else? Who decides whether such decisions are right? Should we all just start selectively honouring our obligations based on whether we think the other party is deserving? I run a fund and have issued bonds on it myself. If I'm sure an investor owes someone else a debt they're overdue on - or believe they scammed - then should I hold backfunds if they try to sell to me and give it to who I think they owe money to (I'm NOT actually aware of any such investor - but IF one existed)? If not, why not - if you think Avalon should do that? Either you believe companies have the right too do that - or you don't. If your argument is over the level of proof then who decides whether the evidence is sufficient? If it isn't the company then surely it can't be you - the party claiming to be wronged! (NOTE: I 100% believe Bakewell is in the wrong - don't interpret ANYTHING I say as trying to defend him). There has to be some uninvolved arbiter - which, shockingly, is the role of the legal system (with law-enforcement gathering the evidence when criminal behaviour is believed to be involved). Bitcoin has no alternative to that - so the choice is either use the existing system or descend into anarchy where anyone can break deals at will so long as they claim to believe they were right to do so. In summary: not only do I believe this approach will fail but I believe it MUST and SHOULD fail. As the precedent if it succeeds is a horrible one. At a minimum report it, get a crime number then provide that to Avalon and ask them to delay shipping until either Ian responds to them and/or the issue is resolved. If the purchase is being criminally investigated then they likely DO have sufficient grounds to hold back on shipping to him. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 13, 2013, 08:47:57 PM At a minimum report it, get a crime number then provide that to Avalon and ask them to delay shipping until either Ian responds to them and/or the issue is resolved. If the purchase is being criminally investigated then they likely DO have sufficient grounds to hold back on shipping to him. +1 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 13, 2013, 09:20:12 PM Also, do we have on record anywhere that Ian agreed to internet arbitration in the event of disagreement? //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// CPA Shareholder Protection Agreement Customer: Ian B. (bitcointalk.org: ianbakewell) CPA Agents: usagi (tsukino) DATE: August 31st, 2012 //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// A. GLBSE Shareholder Protection Agreement 1. Parties are Ian and his business ("the business"), CPA ("CPA") and the GLBSE shareholders of the business ("the shareholders"). 2. CPA will insure shareholders by paying out on behalf of the business should the business become unable or unwilling to fufill the terms of it's contract (see section C). 3. CPA will not be liable for losses greater than the value of the funds held in trust; all other liabilities are the sole responsibility of the business. 4. No party may cancel this contract although any party may choose to accelerate their obligation at any time. B. Payment of Premium 1. The business will contribute one bitcoin (or more) per week to a trust account operated by CPA. 2. The payment address is [1JHP6iaNmPs7osgPKoiki2i28ndm8rDddU] ("CPA Accounts #18 (Ian)"). 3. The first week of coverage is 2012 Week #36 (September 2nd to September 8th). C. Indemnification Procedure 1. If the business breaks the terms of their contract without reparation, CPA will pay the value of the trust account to the shareholders of the business on behalf of the business. 2. A period of 30 days will be allowed for the business to respond and make reparations before paying out on any default event. D. Expiration Clause 1. If there is no default event prior to September 15th, 2013, CPA will contact the business and request guidance; the options will be: 1. to extend coverage, 2. to release the trust account to the business, 3. to release the trust account to the shareholders (as a special dividend). 2. The guidance will be published on the CPA website for a period of 30 days before actoin is taken on that guidance. E. Insurability (This is the "Fine Print") 1. Indemnity The insurance company indemnifies, or compensates, the shareholders in the case of certain losses only up to the lower of the shareholder's interest and the trust amount. 2. Insurable interest The shareholders must directly suffer from the loss; the shareholders have a "stake" in the loss or damage to the assets insured. 3. Utmost good faith The business is bound by a good faith bond of honesty and fairness. Material facts must be disclosed. 4. Contribution Insurers which have similar obligations to the insured contribute prior to any contribution by CPA. 5. Subrogation CPA acquires legal rights to pursue recoveries on behalf of the insured; for example, the insurer may sue those liable for insured's loss. 6. Causa proxima, or proximate cause The cause of loss (the peril) must be directly related to the breaking of the business's contract for financial gain at the shareholders' expense. 7. Mitigation - Before, and in case of any loss or casualty, the business must attempt to keep the loss to a minimum, as if the asset was not insured. F. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach of this contract, shall be settled by binding internet arbitration at judge.me in accordance with the judge.me arbitration agreement. The arbitrator's decision shall be final and legally binding and judgment may be entered thereon. 2. The business must indemnify (make whole) CPA's incurred legal fees if they lose their claim, limited to the amount required to be paid by CPA to judge.me. 3. All judge.me fees related to this contract must be paid in bitcoins. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Confirmed Given what happened, I have the right to open a case on him, and seek damages. I would extend those damages to what he has announced his assets are, as is the nature of my company to do so, on behalf of the shareholders. I will investigate doing this but I am feeling really tired today. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 13, 2013, 09:27:16 PM Here's another, for documenting Ian's assets.
Dividends are currently suspended. I was preparing to order the Avalon ASIC on the morning of the 31st... The total of the funds raised from the transitional tranche alongside the growth fund brought us up to just over BTC130 ...I could use 75 to order one box, and sit on the rest... or I could take a loan to kick us up to 150 and order two. I found a shark tank deal for a BTC20 loan. To repay this loan BAKEWELL will direct 100% of its hashpower to our creditor @ 50btc pps rates against our debt until the BTC20 is paid back. Once the initial BTC20 is paid back BAKEWELL regains its hashpower and will resume dividends on the regular schedule. Then the BTC received on the growth fund will be forwarded to our creditor for a short time in order to cover their profit for the loan. On the bright side, after a hell of an interesting / nail biting morning... I think I was successful in placing an order for two Avalon ASIC (#2 batch) and I think I should be in the first handful of those orders. -I made the purchase via a WalletBit account, so we have a receipt on file with them :) Once these come in I will sell the gaming PC's & I figure the sale of those should cover one more Avalon box with the remainder going toward the expansion units, So if all goes well that means BAKEWELL will have 3 full Avalon ASIC boxes up and running shortly. https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/793824_10200481547427828_1358691741_o.jpg and https://bitfunder.com/asset/BAKEWELL Shares outstanding: 6000 First Tranche: sold out (.15 per | 2500 total | BTC375 raised) Balanced shares: Ian given 748 shares with another 252 given out as bonus for a total of 1000 growth and maintenance hold 1500 shares ------- Transitional Tranche: sold out (.15 per | 500 total | BTC75 raised) Ian given 200 shares growth and maintenance now hold 1800 shares ------- Gaming Rigs: $4000 CAD (paid BTC375) https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/327485_4620856366037_204898907_o.jpg https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/703866_4949127652614_755211883_o.jpg ------- Avalon ASICs: $3000 USD (paid BTC151.59914357) There are a few others. guys, go to the archival board here and search for bakewell $4000 and bakewell 6000 and bakewell avalon and stuff. If you find any other posts link 'em! We need this info to make a list of the assets he claimed to be buying on behalf of his investors. deprived: wake up, he bought the avalons in the capacity of an officer of his company. he's guilty at least of fraud if he didn't buy them in his company name and ever tried to say they were personal buys. So Avalon would not risk anything rerouting the orders. What, you think Ian is going to incriminate himself in court? Thats a laugh riot. The guy is probably shaking in fear under a mattress in hell's kitchen right about now. So it's still a longshot but we need a statement from avalon. To do that we need an official judgement. So we need some sort of judgement or criminal case file number. A judgement from judge.me MIGHT be sufficient because it is legally enforceable in Canada. If I won a judgement via judge.me I would have ironclad means to seize property via the court legally. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: niko on April 13, 2013, 10:57:27 PM I suggest everyone should immediately quit discussing strategies and legal options in this public thread. Communicate via email/skype/in person, and even then make sure you are not communicating with Ian's puppet accounts.
As I already pointed out, I have no stake in this matter anymore. The reason I sold out and quit dealing with Bakewell was that I decided not to waste any more time or money on him. This is still so. I am sorry for those of you who have not seen things the same way, and continued dealing with him. I wish you best of luck recovering your belongings. In case any of you decide to report this matter, a good place to start is http://www.edmontonpolice.ca/communitypolicing/organizedcrime/economiccrimes.aspx Ian, if you read this thread - read it again. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 13, 2013, 11:12:25 PM deprived: wake up, he bought the avalons in the capacity of an officer of his company. he's guilty at least of fraud if he didn't buy them in his company name and ever tried to say they were personal buys. So Avalon would not risk anything rerouting the orders. What, you think Ian is going to incriminate himself in court? Thats a laugh riot. The guy is probably shaking in fear under a mattress in hell's kitchen right about now. So it's still a longshot but we need a statement from avalon. To do that we need an official judgement. So we need some sort of judgement or criminal case file number. A judgement from judge.me MIGHT be sufficient because it is legally enforceable in Canada. If I won a judgement via judge.me I would have ironclad means to seize property via the court legally. If you get a judgment of any kind that's entirely different. Not sure why you think he'd agree to judge.me arbitrating though - and they won't issue a judgment without BOTH parties agreeing to them hearing the case. You producing a forum post (about an entirely different dispute with him) is NOT going to convince judge.me to do anything. You saying he's guilty has no legal standing. Not even if you say it's obvious or that everyone knows. I agree he's totally guilty - but that's also completely irrelevant. As for Ian incriminating himself in court - not sure what you're trying to say. I'm the one saying the court/legal system is the way to go. You're the one who seems to think it can all be ignored because Usagi says he's obviously guilty therefore Avalon will agree as that's enough for them to break a contract. And if it ever gets to court then just think about what you're saying. He's either going to: 1. Plead guilty. 2. Plead non-guilty. And this may shock you - but guilty people who plead not-guilt often lie! Seriously - they do! I know you'll find it hard to believe - but the minute they plead not-guilty they've started lieing and will tell more lies. So in exactly what circumstances do you think he'd be giving testimony in court and telling the tuth? The only defendants who do that are innocent ones. And people who plead guilty (or don't deny the allegations in civil cases) don't give evidence. A little bit of logical thinking would do you a world of good. The reason I suggest the Police rather than the courts is purely one of time. If you try to bring a civil complaint then it will take a fair while to get to a hearing. As with Avalon the courts are NOT going to immediately issue a judgement or order just because usagi says he's obviously guilty - they like to give the other side time to respond and there's proscribed periods of time for responses etc. Not even if you get shareholders in an unregulated security who agree with you to pass a vote saying he's guilty. Wherease the police can cause action to occur much quicker. Ideally you want someone who made a straightforward loan to him to make the initial complaint - that's a much clearer case to make and there's no risk of the Police getting side-tracked by questions over the nature of the security. One thing I do agree with you on is that Ian Bakewell is likely shitting himself right now - though he'll get over that if everyone wants to mess around with shareholder motions rather than doing something productive like going to the Police. Though if Bitcoin price falls much lower he may be able to repay everything anyway (though I'm by no means convinced his story about some opportunity to renovate trailers is the truth). Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 14, 2013, 01:05:18 AM Not sure why you think he'd agree to judge.me arbitrating though - and they won't issue a judgment without BOTH parties agreeing to them hearing the case. You producing a forum post (about an entirely different dispute with him) is NOT going to convince judge.me to do anything. Read the post. he agreed to judge,me arbitration already, in the case that he screwed over his shareholders. This is certainly "any related controversy", and that wording was chosen for what it means -- ANY RELATED CONTROVERSY AT ALL. It's a shareholder protection agreement, what do you think it's for? Even if we can't get a judgement for his hardware I will ask what they will do for me about his contract. The goal here is to get ANYTHING on Ian -- at all -- so that we don't have to haul his ass to jail. Even though that is where it will probably end up anyway. Update: I have reached out to an associate of Jenell Sale (Ian's GF/wife), will update if I hear anything back. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 14, 2013, 10:18:14 AM Not sure why you think he'd agree to judge.me arbitrating though - and they won't issue a judgment without BOTH parties agreeing to them hearing the case. You producing a forum post (about an entirely different dispute with him) is NOT going to convince judge.me to do anything. Read the post. he agreed to judge,me arbitration already, in the case that he screwed over his shareholders. Yes - but him promising you that judge.me could arbitrate isn't sufficient for them to get involved. Go read their site. Both parties have to sign an agreement with judge.me (and pay fees) before they'll do anything. It's just another promise he made that he can break - and judge.me have no standing to to jump in without his consent made to them. Plus they wouldn't want to anyway - how do they make a profit from (say) finding him in the wrong and awarding costs against him? You do realise judge.me is a private for-profit organisation, not part of the legal system? Their ability to make judgments relies on both parties signing a contract with them in advance - which contract can then be enforced via the main-stream legal system if not adhered to. And their profit comes from them making sure they get their fees lodged with them in advance. So unless you can persuade him to signup with judge.me that idea's a total loss. And why would he do that? He knows what the outcome would be - so if he were willing to do that then he may just as well save himself their fees and either pay up or acknowledge his debt. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 14, 2013, 10:21:42 AM As a (slightly off-topic) side-note to the above. It does occur to me that in future such situations it COULD be possible to have agreements for judge.me to arbitrate to be made binding. That would require signing a contract for their services and lodging funds with them to cover the cost of them arbitrating in any dispute. Only one half the fees would need to be lodged - with the other half lodged by whoever subsequently made a complaint. Not sure they'd do that - but would have thought it could be worked out and actually provide some useful protection (in that an enforcable judgment could be made if they became unresponsive).
Until that happens, agreements to use judge.me are worthless in the event one party just stops responding (other than as additional evidence of their bad-faith). Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 14, 2013, 11:32:29 PM Mods moved my post to scam accusations:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=175887.0 Good work this weekend guys! Things are moving. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 15, 2013, 09:32:03 PM Just a quick progress update for anyone following this thread.
Following niko's sound advice from a few days back, the discussion this weekend moved into more private channels. We've had some progress. Yifu has been officially contacted by the shareholder group. A few very useful new pieces of information have been brought to our attention. Nameface is working on a media website pertaining to bitcoin called BITCITIZEN, and the Bakewell scam will be it's lead story. We are working on wider web exposure of the story. In preparation for the legal approach, we are gathering evidence from the devastation of the original thread and other sources after Ian deleted all his posts. Especially concerned with the nature of Ian's stock offering, as it's now clear that, as shareholders, we have a good claim to ownership of current and ordered equipment and assets. We need more documentation of this. This is all very time consuming, and we all have lives to get on with. We would be very grateful to anyone having any links to interesting facts to post them here or PM them to me. My GPG key is in my sig. Email on profile page. Finally, I have been asked by others in the shareholder group to make another appeal to Ian Bakewell. Nothing would please us more, Ian, than if you made contact with us and started a dialogue to try to resolve this. We are determined to make your life extremely uncomfortable in as many creative ways as possible, and we are not going away. You don't need us messing with your online life. Talk to us. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: scrybe on April 16, 2013, 03:04:06 PM I'm late to this party, but I add my 966 shares in affirmation of TradeFortress as CEO and the attempt to reclaim hardware, BTC, and wind down BAKEWELL.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Tachikoma on April 16, 2013, 03:22:25 PM Still no comment from Ukyo at Bitfunder, which I personally think reflects very poorly on his attitude to scamming there. I think you should give Ukto a chance to explain the matter from his angle before throwing scam accusations around. All I know he is currently out of the country on business and can't respond. You can probably verify this by his last login date to the forums. As far as I know was Ian himself that closed the asset; not Ukto. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 16, 2013, 05:53:50 PM Thanks for this information, Tachikoma.
I apologise for any insult, and have edited my comment regarding Ukyo and Bitfunder out of my previous post. However, this is a serious matter, and we have been asking for a comment or information from Ukyo publicly in the Bitfunder thread since 03. April with zero response: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130117.msg1726849#msg1726849 I believe we have given him many chances publicly and by PM to comment. His profile page, by the way, shows last activity on 12. April. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 17, 2013, 02:25:40 AM UPDATE:
I managed to speak with someone at BitFunder and they said they would do what they can to restore the deleted info on BitFunder. Secondly, a message from Ian Bakewell has been received and will (should be) posted on the 19th or 20th. I have no other details. I think we should wait until we have the un-deleted asset information and can read the message from Ian. I will post this info on the other thread in the scam accusation forum as well. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 17, 2013, 02:27:11 AM A message from Ian? Interesting, but why not post it now? Another delay tactic it seems.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 17, 2013, 02:48:18 AM A message from Ian? Interesting, but why not post it now? Another delay tactic it seems. I wasn't sure it was ok to post. Ukyo is away now. He said it was OK to post this (emphasis mine): [10:55] <@Ukto> i was sent a txt msg about bakewell [10:55] <@Ukto> i dont have access to forums atm [10:56] <@Ukto> since i am out and about and dont have my pass [10:56] <@Ukto> i only very quickly looked at the threds [10:56] <@Ukto> not sure what people are wanting [10:56] <@Ukto> but Ian did freeze the asset [10:56] <@Ukto> or request it [10:56] <@Ukto> cant rememebr [10:56] <@Ukto> and sent a skype saying that he will handle shareholders privately [10:56] <@Ukto> i would post the skype, but skype apparently only logs to local client [10:57] <@Ukto> so i will have to post it when i get back [10:57] <@Ukto> And yes, i can repost the details page when i get back [10:57] <@Ukto> useres shares should still be listed normally on bf [10:57] <@Ukto> even if ian were to destroy them, i have backups [10:58] <@Ukto> as for teh stuff with avalon, thats beyond me. [10:58] <@Ukto> I have no say, or anything in the matter [10:58] <@Ukto> all i can do is provide the list of shareholders (which should stay publicly available) [10:59] <@Ukto> just saw where strello said that ppl have been asking for mefor ??? for bakewell since apr 2nd, i am not sure what is being asked for, and apparently missed smoething [10:59] <@Ukto> This week is very very busy, with somet big news. [10:59] <@Ukto> i hope people will understand when announcements are made. [11:00] <@Ukto> umm, i think that about sums up bakewell best i can atm [11:00] <@Ukto> feel free to quote this into the thread if you want :) [11:00] <@Ukto> I will do what i can, that is reasonably within my powers. [11:01] <@Ukto> Restoring deleted descriptions, etc [11:05] <usagi> thanks [11:05] <usagi> Some of the posters online are upset but I told them it really had nothing to do with you [11:06] <usagi> I mean there's not much you can do, but it's great that ian said he would handle his shareholders. [11:06] <usagi> Maybe it won't be a total loss :/ [11:14] <@Ukto> yes, once I get back in town I will post the quote from skype immediately. [11:15] <@Ukto> will be about 2 days Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 17, 2013, 04:36:40 AM Thanks very much for this post usagi.
It's great to hear something from Ukyo, I have lot of respect for him, and I'm sure he will so the right thing here, helping us to find out what has happened with Ian. Now, this message from Ian... Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 17, 2013, 04:44:16 PM I've made and uploaded a very basic, quick Bakewell Scam website @
ianbakewell-scammer.com Please visit it regularly just to get the search engines interested. More content will be added as I get the time, which is really limited for me right now. All comments, suggestions and especially pointers towards content, especially proof of Ian's various misdoings are extremely welcome. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 17, 2013, 06:29:43 PM Well, that's embarassing.
Bluehost are having "technical issues" right now, and can't give me any ETA for my site working!! FFS Cancelling the account right now, and looking for new hosting that works! Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 17, 2013, 07:15:52 PM Bluehost account cancelled and gone- their cancellation service was great!
Website now online at scammer-ianbakewell.com Any new content very welcome Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 17, 2013, 11:50:55 PM DNS resolution fails. Just switched name servers?
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Korbman on April 18, 2013, 01:30:25 AM DNS resolution fails. Just switched name servers? Everything seems fine for me, but I haven't checked in a number of hours. How's it looking for you right now? Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on April 18, 2013, 02:03:45 AM Works now.
I'd suggest changing the design for the <h1> text.. it makes this look a bit like it's not serious.. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: burnside on April 18, 2013, 08:16:18 PM Bluehost account cancelled and gone- their cancellation service was great! Website now online at scammer-ianbakewell.com Any new content very welcome Looks good. Be careful to make sure everything you say is 100% factual and you're following all of your local laws regarding what you are allowed to publish in regards to debt collection. I'd hate for this to get turned against you somehow. Seems far-fetched, but I've seen it happen a number of times. Cheers. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Ukyo on April 19, 2013, 11:25:15 AM Hello everyone,
First off I want to apologize for my tardiness to the discussion. I have had some big things going on the last few weeks and was only watching specific threads I was also just out of town for the last week where I had spotty access. Either way, enough with the excuses. I have restored the description and summary for the BAKEWELL asset and listing them here as well for future reference. Summary: Code: 6000 shares outstanding Description: Code: BAKEWELL is an asset that originated on the GLBSE & is seeking a new home at BitFunder As for Skype, this is what I recently found in my stack of unread messages: Code: [4/1/2013 3:02:38 PM] Ian: Please post a final list of shareholders in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1706674#new and delist BAKEWELL from BitFunder. I will be dealing with the company through the forum from now on. Thank you. At this point, the shareholder list will remain visible on the BitFunder asset list should someone want to copy and paste it. There are no immediate plans to remove BAKEWELL the list, but might happen in the next few months. I think it should stay public for a while so anyone else can get a copy for reference. This is all I have to help with, wish it was more. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 19, 2013, 12:29:49 PM Thanks vey much for this new information Ukyo.
We really appreciate it. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Deprived on April 19, 2013, 12:49:38 PM At this point, the shareholder list will remain visible on the BitFunder asset list should someone want to copy and paste it. There are no immediate plans to remove BAKEWELL the list, but might happen in the next few months. I think it should stay public for a while so anyone else can get a copy for reference. This is all I have to help with, wish it was more. There's a quick something (two things in fact) you could do Ukyo that may help. When lists of shareholders are imported to Bitfunder they don't show up in the public asset list unless/until the account-holder enters a BTC address. Can you confirm whether or not the public list is actually complete? If not, could you email those not on it to add a BTC address. Second thng you could do is identify which BTC addresses in the list are Ian's. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 19, 2013, 12:58:09 PM I just pulled the Bakewell Asset list into a Google Fusion Table (https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=1HSeMjb3C-e7cFab9JNZxCXu8GpD8VaPl1jJ46jY).
Now it is preserved in another location. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: iCEBREAKER on April 19, 2013, 10:25:07 PM I just pulled the Bakewell Asset list into a Google Fusion Table (https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=1HSeMjb3C-e7cFab9JNZxCXu8GpD8VaPl1jJ46jY). Now it is preserved in another location. Because bitfloor, I've changed my payout address. Please update! Thanks. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 20, 2013, 06:24:09 AM This morning has brought a major breakthrough!! :)
All Bakewell shareholders known to us have been PM'd with the details. The updated shareholder list is: usagi- 294 tulkos- 483 strello- 97 iCEBREAKER- ?? fourd00rgtz- 300 MikeMark- 300 nameFace- 252 wisard- 1123 Evolvex- 111 Razcnah 730 scrybe- 966 If there are any shareholders left out there, now is the time to get in touch. Please visit and link as widely as possible to: scammer-ianbakewell.com Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 20, 2013, 08:14:06 AM This morning has brought a major breakthrough!! :) All Bakewell shareholders known to us have been PM'd with the details. So, this is great news indeed :) I vote to make the information public. Let people know what's going on. I vote we should keep a record of what we are doing and what Ian said he was going to do, so that no one "forgets" what's going on. My thoughts are, within 3 days we need solid information from Ian one way or the other or we need to go to the police. Now that we have you-know-who on board it is time to show results, either Ian to do what he said he would do and make a post here as he promised Ukyo on Skype, or for us to get a police report and send it to you-know-who. I also think it's very clear we've already elected TradeFortress as the new CEO in Ian's absence, do we need to re-vote on that? TradeFortress please forward the shareholder count from this thread (it's over 65% last I checked) voting you in as CEO to you-know-who and make the request formally. Good job team ^^ Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 20, 2013, 09:26:40 AM Thanks for your thoughts usagi.
All shareholders have all the known information at this point. One potential new shareholder has contacted me by email- Klaus Franke, claiming to hold 230. I've asked him for verification. I've sent out the interim CEO/ spokesman ballot list to all shareholders, asking for any more suggestions, and I'm waiting for responses to that including yours. However if you wish, I can accept that with your last post you have agreed to the Ballot list and cast your vote for TradeFortress. I think the correct way to proceed with this process is by communication, and voting proportionate to shares held. Please be careful with what you post in public. We don't want to put anyone in a difficult legal situation. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on April 20, 2013, 09:43:29 AM I've sent out the interim CEO/ spokesman ballot list to all shareholders, asking for any more suggestions, and I'm waiting for responses to that including yours. However if you wish, I can accept that with your last post you have agreed to the Ballot list and cast your vote for TradeFortress. But we already took a vote for that. Shareholder update: The following shareholders want a motion run to give the CEO seat to TradeFortress. This is the right of the shareholders. 294 usagi 483 tulkos 97 strello unk. iCEBREAKER 300 fourd00rgtz 300 MikeMark 252 NameFace 1123 wisard 111 Evolvex 730 Razcnah ---- 3690 61.5% The motion would still need to be run to make it official. Haven't heard anything from Ukyo yet. I don't have time to pursue this anymore because I have some extra hours at my job recently so someone else will need to take the mantle. I've done what I set out to do (get the ball rolling) now's the time for the whole 'step up and do your part' thing. Someone needs to contact the relevant people (and police if necessary) and what not. Good luck! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=172471.msg1822746#msg1822746 With the above 110 shares from iCEBREAKER and the new 230 we have 67% already voted. I don't see a point in voting again. In any case though I do not approve of nameface as CEO at all -- he has no experience running an asset and has been caught lying about his holdings in BMF, and being a real pain in the ass about it too, constantly accusing me of being a scammer despite having solid proof from both myself and burnside that his story does not check out. So while he has rights as a shareholder I feel if you try to push him in (esp. after the above vote) there will be serious problems. I also suggest that instead of holding a vote again you get this done on BitFunder; TradeFortress or you could draft a motion and ask Ukyo to post it. I've already asked Ukyo to post it but he was away. If you ask him now, he will probably post it. Edit: Not sure if you have got the message, but Ukto is unwilling to change the CEO of the security or things like that because it was not specified in the description / contract. This is from wisard: [snip] Well, then shareholder motions have very little meaning :p anyways I can't be as involved as I was earlier on, so you guys decide what to do. My vote is for tradefortress as before, and I'll throw in with whatever he decides from this point on. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: wisard on April 20, 2013, 09:58:47 AM When I said:
Quote I don't mind either TradeFortress or Dalkore heading this. That wasn't a vote. That was trying to discuss and get a consensus. (For voting to be considered legitimate, we need to make sure that the person voting has that many shares that he has claimed too.) Anyways, I've spoken with Ukyo - and there were a couple of ideas that were discussed as to the new CEO thing. I've send that along to Strello in a PM. I advise we keep discussions in PM until we have a good concrete idea. No use adding to confusion over here. Thanks Usagi. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 20, 2013, 10:27:28 AM I advise we keep discussions in PM until we have a good concrete idea. No use adding to confusion over here. Thanks Usagi. +10 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 20, 2013, 05:08:54 PM New shareholder- validated by emailing me screenshots of all his Bitfunder pages.
Klaus Franke- 230 shares Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 22, 2013, 10:35:39 AM To Ian Bakewell.
Ian, on April 1st, 2013, you froze the Bakewell asset on Bitfunder, telling Ukyo that you would be contacting and dealing with the shareholders to quote from your skype conversation with Ukyo: "I will be dealing with the company through the forum from now on." Not one of the shareholders has heard anything from you since that date. The shareholder group, now demands that you contact us to discuss the future of Bakewell. Please PM nameface, strello, wisard, MikeMark, fourd00rgtz, or scrybe, as they are the most active of the shareholders online. We demand you respond to this message before 12.00 UTC Wednesday April 24th 2013. If you don't respond by that time, we will be taking further steps to recover funds and assets that you have stolen from us. This message has been posted to the original Bakewell thread, and emailed to your known email address, ian.bakewell@gmail.com. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 22, 2013, 10:37:59 AM Updated shareholder list:
usagi- 294 tulkos- 483 strello- 97 iCEBREAKER- 110 fourd00rgtz- 300 MikeMark- 300 nameFace- 252 wisard- 1123 Evolvex- 111 Razcnah 730 scrybe- 966 Klaus Franke- 230 tolan77- 75 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on April 22, 2013, 05:22:58 PM I just pulled the Bakewell Asset list into a Google Fusion Table (https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=1HSeMjb3C-e7cFab9JNZxCXu8GpD8VaPl1jJ46jY). Now it is preserved in another location. Because bitfloor, I've changed my payout address. Please update! Thanks. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 22, 2013, 05:28:50 PM usagi- 294
tulkos- 483 strello- 97 iCEBREAKER- 110 fourd00rgtz- 300 MikeMark- 300 nameFace- 252 wisard- 1123 Evolvex- 111 Razcnah 730 scrybe- 966 Klaus Franke- 230 tolan77- 75 Carnth- 194 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Carnth on April 22, 2013, 05:36:09 PM I have 194 shares of BAKEWELL.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: johnny5 on April 23, 2013, 05:04:37 PM I have a meager 82 shares of BAKEWELL, but count me in. Let me know if I can do anything to help.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: strello on April 24, 2013, 10:36:46 AM Updated shareholder list:
Carnth- 194 Evolvex- 111 fourd00rgtz- 300 johnny5- 82 iCEBREAKER- 110 Klaus_FFM- 230 MikeMark- 300 nameFace- 252 Razcnah- 730 scrybe- 966 strello- 97 tolan77- 75 tulkos- 483 wisard- 1123 usagi- 294 And if you haven't seen it, take a look at the original Bakewell thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.0 Thanks to John K Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Dalkore on April 24, 2013, 04:24:47 PM Updated shareholder list: Carnth- 194 Evolvex- 111 fourd00rgtz- 300 johnny5- 82 iCEBREAKER- 110 Klaus_FFM- 230 MikeMark- 300 nameFace- 252 Razcnah- 730 scrybe- 966 strello- 97 tolan77- 75 tulkos- 483 wisard- 1123 usagi- 294 And if you haven't seen it, take a look at the original Bakewell thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.0 Thanks to John K Updated shareholder list (Descending Order): wisard- 1123 scrybe- 966 Razcnah- 730 tulkos- 483 fourd00rgtz- 300 MikeMark- 300 usagi- 294 nameFace- 252 Klaus_FFM- 230 Carnth- 194 Evolvex- 111 iCEBREAKER- 110 strello- 97 johnny5- 82 tolan77- 75 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: punkideas on April 24, 2013, 08:32:36 PM I have 1 (yes, just 1) share of bakewell, so I guess I'll register.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Peter Lambert on April 25, 2013, 01:37:35 PM I have 1 (yes, just 1) share of bakewell, so I guess I'll register. I have 3 (yes, just 3) shares of bakewell, so I guess I'll register too. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: tolan77 on May 11, 2013, 08:13:18 PM Any updates on how this is preceding? Haven't heard anything in awhile.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: johnny5 on May 12, 2013, 12:47:09 AM So, is anybody going to the convention next week? I can only imagine the ruckus that Yifu will cause there - i imagine him being hounded by folks everywhere he goes (at least I can dream), but someone needs to chat him up about BAKEWELL's 2 B2's .... I'm in the bay area - I'll go do it myself if i can snag a ticket, and can firm up a time & place where he'll be...
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: scrybe on May 12, 2013, 06:20:05 PM So, is anybody going to the convention next week? I can only imagine the ruckus that Yifu will cause there - i imagine him being hounded by folks everywhere he goes (at least I can dream), but someone needs to chat him up about BAKEWELL's 2 B2's .... I'm in the bay area - I'll go do it myself if i can snag a ticket, and can firm up a time & place where he'll be... I'll be there, and I own something like 1/7th of the shares, so I'm planning on bringing it up... If other shareholders are going please let me know and we can try to coordinate a single meeting instead of hitting him up every time Yifu turns around. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: johnny5 on May 12, 2013, 09:45:43 PM I'll be there, and I own something like 1/7th of the shares, so I'm planning on bringing it up... If other shareholders are going please let me know and we can try to coordinate a single meeting instead of hitting him up every time Yifu turns around. Very nice! Please, do keep us posted. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: tolan77 on May 15, 2013, 03:58:42 PM So apparently batch 2 started shipping today...anyone hear anything from yifu? They haven't shipped all of them but they might soon.
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on May 22, 2013, 05:21:25 PM Note to those interested:
There are still actions happening in the background here... ;) Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Carnth on May 22, 2013, 05:35:58 PM Note to those interested: There are still actions happening in the background here... ;) Thanks MikeMark. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: dexX7 on May 22, 2013, 06:26:09 PM Not sure, if it's a good thing to dig up this thread and inb4 sorry for my lazyness, but can someone briefly describe what's happening here and if it's relevant for any Avalon customer?
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: MikeMark on May 22, 2013, 06:31:36 PM Not sure, if it's a good thing to dig up this thread and inb4 sorry for my lazyness, but can someone briefly describe what's happening here and if it's relevant for any Avalon customer? Only relevant if you are a BAKEWELL share-holder. :) Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: superbit on May 28, 2013, 10:18:24 PM Maybe he'll be here:
http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/is-edmonton-ready-for-bitcoin-1.1300731 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Evolvex on May 31, 2013, 12:31:11 PM Thanks for everyones work in getting this sorted out thus far, been awol for a while so havent caught up with whats been going on, but thanks none the less :)
Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: fourd00rgtz on June 09, 2013, 05:41:10 PM If any Bakewell owners are looking to move on, I might be willing to pickup your shares. Not trying to be opportunistic, so if you are considering selling please be aware of the most recent developments and make an informed decision. (owners of record on bitfunder can get info from Strello, our communications volunteer)
Willing to pay above current frozen price, obviously not going as high as pre-disappearance but message me with offers. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: burnside on June 10, 2013, 03:12:08 AM If any Bakewell owners are looking to move on, I might be willing to pickup your shares. Not trying to be opportunistic, so if you are considering selling please be aware of the most recent developments and make an informed decision. (owners of record on bitfunder can get info from Strello, our communications volunteer) Willing to pay above current frozen price, obviously not going as high as pre-disappearance but message me with offers. Ian, is that you? :D Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: fourd00rgtz on June 10, 2013, 06:04:30 AM If any Bakewell owners are looking to move on, I might be willing to pickup your shares. Not trying to be opportunistic, so if you are considering selling please be aware of the most recent developments and make an informed decision. (owners of record on bitfunder can get info from Strello, our communications volunteer) Willing to pay above current frozen price, obviously not going as high as pre-disappearance but message me with offers. Ian, is that you? :D Nope, and my offer is now limited to small volumes.... if anyone is interested. Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: johnny5 on July 02, 2013, 05:50:43 PM FWIW, Ian has appeared (on his twitter feed):
https://twitter.com/IanBakewell/status/351931091365552128 in case he removes it (which if he had half-a-brain i figure he would - then again, we know that'd be giving him a bit too much credit): Quote - Ian Bakewell - @IanBakewell Fireworks (@ Legislature Grounds w/ 8 others) http://4sq.com/1b40jiX Reply Retweet Favorite More 10:11 PM - 1 Jul 13 I suggest any of you fellow twitter-ers, post a reply and publicly shame him. Hopefully he's at least treating his friends to a righteous time (on our dime). Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Korbman on July 02, 2013, 06:54:02 PM FWIW, Ian has appeared (on his twitter feed): https://twitter.com/IanBakewell/status/351931091365552128 I suggest any of you fellow twitter-ers, post a reply and publicly shame him. Hopefully he's at least treating his friends to a righteous time (on our dime). Interesting, I figured he'd disappear off the face of the Earth. Unfortunately I don't ever use twitter, but for those that do maybe spreading the word might help! Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: johnny5 on July 02, 2013, 11:39:13 PM He just tweeted again:
https://twitter.com/IanBakewell/status/352203312952664064 Quote - Ian Bakewell - @IanBakewell Sooo hot outside... sandwich for dinner (@ Press'd The Sandwich Company) http://4sq.com/11eDXcx 4:13 PM - 2 Jul 13 Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: Evolvex on July 19, 2013, 06:24:46 PM FWIW, Ian has appeared (on his twitter feed): https://twitter.com/IanBakewell/status/351931091365552128 in case he removes it (which if he had half-a-brain i figure he would - then again, we know that'd be giving him a bit too much credit): Quote - Ian Bakewell - @IanBakewell Fireworks (@ Legislature Grounds w/ 8 others) http://4sq.com/1b40jiX Reply Retweet Favorite More 10:11 PM - 1 Jul 13 I suggest any of you fellow twitter-ers, post a reply and publicly shame him. Hopefully he's at least treating his friends to a righteous time (on our dime). Yup, tweet sent :) Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: FenixPR on August 01, 2013, 09:06:09 PM The Bakewell saga continues over here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=265521.0 with a success story and a new beginning! :) Title: Re: [BAKEWELL] Action Proposal - Call for Volunteers Post by: usagi on August 01, 2013, 10:02:02 PM The Bakewell saga continues over here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=265521.0 with a success story and a new beginning! :) I consider this thread a success and the matter of BitFunder's BAKEWELL shares closed.... for now. But Ian, if you're reading this, be very aware that you owe me money and I will hold you liable for the 430 shares of BAKEWELL you stole from BMF investors when you relisted on BTC-TC. Not to mention the other people you ripped off by running with the shorts & loans you took out. Those matters will not be closed until they are resolved. |
