SOLD: three of five 1/10th oz gold coins.

RESERVED: The 2oz Kookaburra and four of the 1/2 oz silver coins have been reserved by a buyer.

RESERVED: two 1/10th oz. gold coins (misc. and Canada 1996) have been reserved by a buyer.

It points to a flaw in the system. There are always ways that some people will think it is unfair. This is the definition, however, of a democracy. You don't need to please everyone. And some people who are in the minority, like LoweryCBS, have the right to speak up and fight for what they believe in. That's fine. You don't have to please everyone.

"Fairly" is the real root of the problem, isn't it? Take the offensive comment LoweryCBS just lobbed at me -- I don't have a scammer tag, I'll spare you the details, but this guy actually believes he has the right to request a shareholder be stripped of his rightfully paid for shares and voting privileges -- and why? Because of rumor and emotion (certainly not because the community has labeled me a scammer).

The root of the problem is in fact that this is a democratic community process where people like LoweryCBS who don't read contracts and who don't read what people say can vote. They just vote with emotion and rumor and think they can do whatever they want just because they don't like someone. Actually, that's fine. Saying that people like him don't have a right to vote merely because they are being unfair or rude is disingenuous. Since the "problem" is that it's a democracy, then, and that of course some people are bound to not be in the majority, we might say then that there is no real problem with the current system.

That is the real failing of the current system -- that nothing is perfect. Allowing downvotes to cancel out upvotes just makes the problem worse -- in that case people would not only be able to manipulate the system to the upside, but also the downside.

If we change the current system it should only be to make it more like a LTC-GLOBAL motion, where each of your LTC-GLOBAL shares counts as one vote. Let's be honest. If someone bought 50% of LTC-GLOBAL (I could do this if I want, for example), then I would be able to list on LTC-GLOBAL anything I want, because I basically would own the company. While that may sound unfair, if you think about it, it makes much more sense than the 10 BTC rule. If someone buys shares just to vote something, it means they also acquire the risk of owning those shares. And if they ruin the company they ruin their own money. It really does take care of itself. You don't see it when idiots downvote someone they don't like with 10 shares. But you see it when someone owns 20% or 30% of a company, they make a stupid vote, and they lose half their investment. People like this learn very, very fast what business is really all about or they get taken out of the picture.

This is different than using 50 shares on 5 accounts to cancel 500 shares. It's the complete opposite. If you pay too much I'd gladly sell you some of my excess shares. So you see, in the end, a proper democratic system like we have now on BTC-TC protects itself against riff-raff who believes that people don't have rights. It really lets people know who they are and how small they are and teaches people to have respect for the community. I really believe that and I believe in the community. Who wants to take away other's rights, and who do stupid things like creating 5 accounts to downvote someone, there would be no problem like that in a fully democratic community system.

Again, reading comprehension issues -- it would not indemnify if we didn't accelerate it, because the value of the policy was limited to around the total amount CPA would receive plus 20 bitcoins. You need to think, and read the contract -- the contract doesn't seem to make sense as it stands -- why would anyone sign such a policy, which amounts to an interest free loan to BMF? There was never any need or reason to do that, and it was announced in a shareholder letter what we were doing. You don't seem to get this was for the good of both companies. I think that's your problem -- your cognitive dissonance is preventing you from seeing that CPA used this contract as a model for others, and that was all this was ever supposed to be. Why is it that none of the people we actually did business with complained about this? If I had not done this contract, put it out, then it would have had no review process. Notice what everyone is saying about the contract -- it misled investors. Not that there was anything improper about the contract itself. But this leads back to misleading investors or not -- ALL the information regarding this was published, ALL the info that investors needed to make a decision was published, announced in shareholder letters, discussed in threads and so on. You fail to see that: NO INVESTORS WERE MISLED.


I'm not denying I said that, but could you please provide links? I'd like to see the context. More likely than not I was referring to the motion which covered the insurance, the 100 btc gift I gave to BMF investors, the right to invest 10% into non-mining securities and so on. You're likely confusing the motion which was passed by shareholders with the contract itself. So what you're saying about BMF being 20 BTC poorer is crapola.


You seem to be confused; mining crashed and we ended up losing 50% of our value. Are you quoting me? It seems out of place; provide a link or more context please. I am lax to think you're misquoting me here but you don't seem to be providing any references.


Really? I used a single dash? I think you're misquoting me, no? Putting words in my mouth again?


Did you read the contract? I think you're going to need to provide references for the quotes in your last post -- you appear to be intentionally trying to deceive people into believing I said or meant something I didn't.


Dunno, no meaning. I didn't end up taking any kind of premium. If you want, I'll move 20 BTC from BMF to CPA. I don't really care, it's of no meaning to me. CPA profited immensely from the advertising. Since you keep insisting that BMF investors were 'completely screwed over' (notice the single quotes; that's how you paraphrase someone to avoid making it look like you're a troll and a liar) -- I doubt that's what you want.

I asked you what you did want -- what remedy you were looking for, and you ignored me. I'll ask you again. What precise remedy are you looking for in this situation? You don't seem to get I didn't scam anyone, and I didn't rip off anyone either. If you can't come up with a remedy and you don't believe I deserve a scammer tag for the accusations in the subject, I politely ask you to go away -- you're trolling and hijacking a thread.


A large number of your questions are immaterial; you misquote me, or misrepresent me, and then make a ludictous statement like 'Thanks for admitting you misled investors'. I will ignore such rubbish just like everyone else.


you operate from a position of ludicrous misinformation and lack of information.. I have already explained 2 or 3 times now why I deleted posts.

I am beginning to think you are not a good representative of the people who believe I am a scammer. Let me be honest with you -- you suck at arguing. Look, you've said what you had to say. Augustocroppo and BCB looked into this and dropped it realizing there was no evidence. Even puppet and guruvan admitted flat out they had no real evidence against me (again -- want links?)

The admission by two of the most vocal trolls against me is extremely telling. If they didn't have any evidence, it was not least of all because NO ONE had posted any. Therefore they also did not have any. Please Deprived. Go away. There are many people on the scam accusations forum who deserve your time and dogged fight for justice, but not me. You got it wrong here. Here's a list of people you should worry about, taken from the scam accusation forum directory:

SCAMMER: matthewh3. Violating agreement by HorseRider
Now there's an interesting case. Go spend your time doing something useful there.

Gigamining math by conspirosphere.tk
The mining bond crap is only just beginning. You have no idea whats going to come out of this. Remember back when a group of mining bond issuers flooded the market with shares just before ASICs were announced? Yep, you got it. Better get some popcorn for this one. I'd watch it more closely, you won't regret it.

BITCOIN MAGAZINES ORDERED NOV. 11th 2012 NOT RECEIVED by smoothie
Vladamir and matthew are probably going to go down as some of the biggest scammers on the forum ever. Did you know that Matthew owes NYAN investors over $10,000? No shit. Spend your energy on that and I swear on my life I will give it all to the NYAN investors and take nothing for myself.

TORWallet - Scammer by Tweaked
This is an issue of vital importance to the community.

Scammer tag: PatrickHarnett by MPOE-PR
While I think MPOE-PR probably needs anti-depressant medication, the Patrick Harnett story is of someone who really did intentionally mislead investors -- he actually really did scam people with KRAKEN. Look it up -- what you are saying I did is nothing compared to this. What I did, people get their money back and the company makes money. What he did, is a straight up scam. Go bother him not me.

Scammed for >$500 by Chandler Weyman "Takliano" Corbin from Boone, NC by c0dex
Now THAT'S a scammer accusation thread if I ever saw one

Ian Bakewell by usagi
You want to see someone who defrauded his investors? Hot shit, this guy never fails to dissapoint. From misrepresenting the value of his company in letters to shareholders, to backing out of an insurance contract in a hostile manner and attempting to pocket the money, to being involved in an unissued-share voting scandal which is causing his investors to flee in droves.. Go here for some real fun.

.................And on and on and on.

So why the f*** are you bothering me? You know:

a) you are not an invetsor nor did you lose a red cent on this
b) The contract was good for both CPA investors and BMF investors
c) No one was ripped off or deceived (no damages, no victims)
d) The contracts were clearly closed down as advertised in the contracts
e) everything was made very, very public.. shareholder letters... forum discussions.. publishing the contract on our webpage, etc. (no one was misled)
f) I spent a lot of time changing how my companies operated due to complaints from non-investors like you, which I didn't even have to do, not even have to give you the time of day, at my own expense.

Do you see? Seriously, what the f*** is your problem? Put a number on it or go away; can you show how many bitcoins BMF or CPA actually LOST because of this? No? Then why don't you just stop?

I said, you have major reading comprehension issues. Feel free to post the contract and we'll go through it line by line.

That was a mind-bogglingly stupid thing to say. Of course the entire purpose of the contract was to show people we were in that line of business.


It was indeed a very skillful thing to do, you know, show people that we were capable of doing certain kinds of business.


You have major reading comprehension issues; I said value, not price:


You seem to have a complete lack of respect for my intelligence. Believe me, it shows -- and I'm the one that keeps pointing it out to you.


Do you finally understand how badly you have lost this part of the argument? I didn't admit anything -- you mischaracterized what I did, misquoted me, and then pretended your lack of mental acuity was an admission, on my behalf, of misleading investors. You're either being paid to troll me, or you're insane. Please, just go away. Everyone else did.

So EskimoBob owned 40 NYAN? You make it sound like a parade of people. And, it is just as much a suprise to me as it is to anyone. Wasn't it EskimoBob who said many times he would never invest in my companies? For god's sake think -- the whole scam accusation thread against EskimoBob is because he signed a contract with me that I would buy back 5 BMF shares (FIVE, yes FIVE) and he couldn't keep his end of the bargain. He did not represent himself as a shareholder of my companies at all. He made it clear he was not invested and did not want to invest. Mircea Popescu and gang were the same. So many times, MPOE-PR said what I was doing was garbage. Then boom, what does it turn out? Not only was Mircea Popescu invested in NYAN.A to the tune of 100 shares (100 bitcoins), he based his own competing CDO directly off of that investment!!!

It now appears as if there was an organized campaign against me to crash my companies so people could buy shares on the cheap. Unfortunately GLBSE crashed. Their plan failed.

Can you think of another explanation for their vocal actions and misrepresentationof their position? This reeks of people like Soros saying gold was in a bubble even as he was buying up as much gold as he could. Six months ago, remember that? People always talk their own books. Think about it.


Do you get that the value of BMF and CPA went up after we signed those contracts because CPA got more business, and was able to invest a little more into BMF, which allowed BMF to participate in bulk offer IPOs? Not to mention the additional income streams for CPA? The contract had zero material value to both companies. However, it enabled me to start a new line of business and sign quite a few contracts. Do you get that?

There isn't a shareholder in the world that would have said no to increasing the revenues and net value of my companies. You need to think.

1/2 oz Canada 1993

1/4 oz Australian Nugget 1992
1/4 oz Canada 1993

1/10 oz Canada 1988
1/10 oz Australian Nugget 1990
1/10 oz Canada 1993
1/10 oz Canada 1994
1/10 oz Canada 1996

All coins are .9999 (just saying -- if you have seen these coins, it's minted on the face).

All the coins except the 1oz sliver were placed into airtight plastic sleeves (or hardshell cases for the Australian coins) upon minting and have never been removed from their protective casings. The 1oz silvers were removed only to take this photo and then were placed back into their tube with a new "glass-cloth" which First Majestic sent to me when I bought the silver. All the coins (gold and silver) look shiny, new, unscratched, unpocked and unspotted. The silver coins' empty areas look like mirrors. I am unfamiliar with minting terminology beyond that.. I can't say they're "perfect" or "mint" or whatever the rating system is, because I don't know, but they're in visually excellent condition.

UPDATE:

SOLD:
1 x 1/2 oz. gold coin. (delivered!)
2 x 1/4 oz. gold coin (delivered!)
5 x 1/10 oz. gold coin (delivered!)
12 x 1/2 oz silver coin (4 delivered!, 8 still in transit!)
22 x 1 oz silver coin (2 delivered, 20 still in transit!)
1 x 2oz silver coin (delivered!)

REMAINING:
SILVER INVENTORY
28 x 1/2 oz First Majestic Business Strike Rounds (2012)

I am selling for SPOT, and free shipping anywhere in the world.
At current prices that's ~2.05 per ounce.

The whole deal then (14 oz) would be 28.7 BTC.

All coins/bars are in visually perfect condition. Pictures available at http://kongzi.ca/silver/

I am not responsible for VAT or any import duties you will face, then again I will not write "gold coinz inside!@#" all over the box. I paid such taxes myself to import these to my destination, so likely will you.

I am sorry to hear that. Take your time... as important as bitcoin seems to be it should always take a second seat to real life.

The contract was signed while the NAV was already below 1, therefore the situation you are describing was known to be impossible. That was the intention and why it was done this way. Furthermore you cannot presume what I would have done and then say that therefore I did in reality scam people. That's crazy.

What you are saying is intentional deception. You are attempting to manipulate the price of my companies and destroy my reputation.

Patrick owes me about $1000-$1500 too.

However, I may be able to assist with this partially. Patrick Harnett was a CPA investor. His debt to CPA does not total what we owe him (there are leftover shares). I will be contacting Patrick shortly and asking him what he wants to do with his shares -- as soon as my assets are set up on BTCT. He may decide to claim them but, if he receives a scammer tag first (or does he already have one?) then when I liquidate his shares I do not mind applying the liquidated value of the remaining shares to some of his debts.

I'd propose to liquidate his shares for fair market value, and pay off some of his debts for him. This would depend on community support; i'd want to see him with a scammer tag (obviously) before I would consider doing this, and I would want support from burnside/BTCT and/or the majority of the community in order to take that action. I don't want this backfiring on me later. Comments? Would that be the right thing to do?

Oh. That must be why I haven't seen you around. Whatever.


Thanks. There's enough noise on the forums already.

I own LTC-GLOBAL and I have every right to vote with my shares and leave public comments like anyone else.

The fact that I am only allowed to list BMF, CPA and NYAN limited does not impact my right to hold a personal account, to own LTC-GLOBAL, and to buy and sell shares with my own BTC.

I politely request an apology. What you said was extremely rude.


Of course -- I did not vote on my own assets like many others did, and I have 13 shares, not 10, because I am investing in LTC-GLOBAL to invest in it, not merely to obtain voting rights as some probably have done.

second to this;

a) they DID receive coverage -- I accelerated the contract and they paid ~500 bitcoins for ~500 bitcoins of return coverage. Read the contract. It contained an acceleration clause.
b) the coverage was not meaningful because, as explained, the contract was not material.

c) I "whitter on" about NAV because that is the subject of this thread against me. Now that you yourself have said I don't deserve a scammer tag for these accusations, can you please leave me alone?

I don't think so and no shareholder has ever said so. BMF paid about 30 bitcoins to CPA. In return I gave 100 bitcoins of my own personal money to BMF. If you want me to make reparations, fine, I will -- by taking back the balance of 70 bitcoins and putting it in my personal account. Is that what you want? Will that satisfy you? What precise remedy are you looking for in this situation, as you have already said I don't deserve a scammer tag?


There was no need to vote specifically on the insurance contract because it did not represent a material change in the value of either company. The absolute worst you can say is that I transferred 30 bitcoins to CPA and then put it back again. I also donated personal shares of CPA back to CPA and to NYAN.B as discussed in NYAN letter to shareholders #38. What's your problem here, precisely? What remedy are you requesting?

I've already explained several times -- and this explanation has been accepted by many people -- that the contract was intended to be accelerated, hence the acceleration clause, and used as a model for other contracts. This has been explained -- to you in particular -- many times, despite the fact that you seem to continuously claim I never answer your questions. We did in fact sign several such contracts after people became aware we were offering that business -- not least of all the BAKEWELL contract which is the topic of discussion in the thread against Ian.


No, it has been explained several times, not least in letter to shareholders #38 as mentioned, and in responses to "critique of usagi's businesses" which you posted a couple months ago.... And again, here.


Do you get that you only believe that because you have no clue what went on in management discussions? You have no IDEA what you are talking about. you cannot point to a lack of evidence and then turn around and say that there is a lack of evidence, therefore I scammed pepole. That is ridiculous. Furthermore this has now been explained to you several times why we did what we did and what the results were -- we signed contracts with BAKEWELL, BITCOINMININGRS (or something), we were in talks with DMC and GBF and others as well for such contracts. All of it because of the model contract I created. Why do you think there was an acceleration clause and the amount was around equal? What would be the point of such a contract, take 500 bitcoins from BMF with limited liability of.... 500 bitcoins? Are you insane? This wasn't a scam and it wasn't conflict of interest. Wake up please.


Big mistake. I am giving you fact from the horse's mouth. I was the guy who ran CPA and BMF and I am telling you what we did and why, in response to your question. I'm kinda tired, after all these monts, of you making baseless claims from a position of ignorance. I mean come on, I give up already -- what's the point of pursuing this?

If it wasn't for four people: You, Puppet, EskimoBob, and Deeplink, there would be ZERO claims against me. Puppet was a troll who admitted he had no proof for what he was saying about me (want a link?). EskimoBob is full of shit and pretty much everyone knows it. Deeplink was a shill account, who literally ONLY posted in threads against me. When this was pointed out by augustocroppo he disappeared. And then there's you -- who, amazingly, was offered a job to troll me in public my MPOE-PR and has been publicly paid shares of MPOE.ETF by MPOE-PR after engaging in trolls against me.


One of your standard tactics is claiming that I don't answer your questions. Everyone who has followed these threads knows that's a lie -- I am, I admit, too vocal in answering each and every one of your questions.

Just stop for Christ's sake. Unless you're still getting paid? I mean seriously. You said what you had to say. Unless you're getting paid for posting this crap against me, why don't you try shutting up for a change and letting other people weigh in? Stop trying to outshout me and outshout everyone else who has posted here. Just stop for a while.

You apparently weren't even an investor in my companies and I am wrapping them up fairly. Go away. You have nothing on me, you never will have anything on me, and there is nothing on me. Why don't you go read what people have actually said about me before you start whining I ripped them off?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=127096.msg1349417#msg1349417

Just wait a couple days and I will pop up 10+ more emails I've received directly from shareholders thanking me for doing a good job wrapping up the assets.

Any of them are free to come here and complain. You, probably not so much anymore. Not that I could stop you though, I guess.

One of the problems is that this is really just your opinion, Deprived.

Yes, you believe you are right but that doesn't make it so. For example you believe I acted in conflict of interest in the BMF/CPA contract. In reality this was approved by a shareholder motion, and announced in a shareholder letter. Others also disagree with your analysis itself, such as Augustocroppo (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1369333#msg1369333).

Regarding falsifying of NAVs, I said over and over that we would be adding value via analysis. Sometimes it worked out and sometimes it didn't. I also ran shareholder motions regarding this -- so sorry but this is simply what people wanted. When puppet and eskimobob (and you) started complaining about this I went out of my way to fix it, I changed the way we valued companies from my analysis data to pulling data directly off GLBSE. When people started complaining about THAT, I redid the spreadsheets AGAIN, to include both columns. After that, the accusations continued only that old, outdated data was repeatedly posted by EskimoBob, or data that he or puppet had created by hand and had nothing to do with average market prices or what we were holding.

But the point is no, I did not falsify navs.

No, I did not manipulate share prices. If we bought shares that we held in BMF and that caused the price to rise, anyone is free to sell into that high price and make a profit. If we sold into a crashing company, anyone is free to get a deal and buy into a too-low price. Manipulation of markets is next to impossible because of this. If I sell into a crashing company and then try to buy back cheaply I am competing with every other trader watching the stock. And it's well known there were several bots trading. Basically there was no way I could do this. And FWIW -- buy low sell high is NOT market manipulation on ANY SCALE. It's just good trading and it was the entire point of BMF -- to trade on behalf of investors. It seems a bit disingenuous to accuse me of market manipulation on any scale.

And no, I did not mislead investors. In fact one of the reasons I published spreadsheets and weekly letters to shareholders discussing claims is to give investors every tool possible to make their own decision about the value of my companies. Look at what puppet and eskimobob were able to do --> They took the holdings I had published and calculated their own value. Had I not given them the tools and information to make their own, informed decision --> they could not have done that. The very fact that I enabled them to do that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that I did not attempt to mislead investors. I specifically disclosed as much as I could about everything I was doing.

That is the point -- I'm not guilty of what has been levied against me. If you want to talk about another thing you feel I did wrong, make a new thread. This one has been done to death.

This thread needs a comment but I agree with you, mods seem unwilling to comment further. This makes me exceedingly sad, as this thread and similar have now cost me an incalculable amount of time, health and money.

I understand that he gave you his word. However, this isn't really a contract. Although I am lax to bring up other scam accusation threads specifically, it is common practice that without an "actual contract", one's word -- even when several witnesses can come forward -- is just not good enough. Now, I'm not a moderator so I can't say for sure, but that is what I have seen several times in the past. Ok, so he broke his word and he is slime. He is a dink. But he did not "break a contract" in that sense of the word.

The issue of whether or not he has a scammer tag, on this point, would still be open. If he led you to believe that he was going to give or assign value to you even without a contract, and you confirmed this with him, then he defrauded you. To this three comments stand out to me in particular

1. "first come first serve"
2. "OK you are first on the list." and
3. "We just have to wait until I receive the records from the GLBSE then confirm your associated email then'll we'll send the BTC28.7 to the bitcoin wallet address associated with your GLBSE RSM claim."

Because of point 3, now that it is proven he has the lists, if he does not now give you the 28.7 BTC he has broken his word.

I believe based on that that you have a case.

So, what I would like to see -- as a community member -- is that Matthew makes an arrangement with you to guarantee the payment of the 28.7 BTC either immediately or by a certain date (not exceeding 60 days) with an interest payment made to you, or that you agree to a payment plan with him. If he cannot do this (I.E. if he cannot appease you) then we have to admit it, he broke his word... sure, why not give him a scammer tag. The key here is I really would like to see Matthew given a "remedy" -- give him the chance to cut a deal with you. Please do not be heartless, that is all I am saying. Matthew has an excellent track record doesn't he? Maybe we should give him another chance to make this right?


Ok, you're right -- I misunderstood. What you have said is very convincing. I agree.


This makes me sad to say it but I agree. But as a community member please give him a chance to make this right. Can we wait until Matthew makes a response (or seven days) before he is tagged?

I find this case interesting. It is my speculation GigaVPS will not get a scammer tag because he has an active court case against nefario (according to Diablo) and therefore has plausable deniability that Nefario has not turned over data or money. Therefore, it is not his fault, and it looks like Giga really is merely doing the best he can in a bad, bad situation.

I change my earlier call -- I don't think he should get a scammer tag anymore. Didn't know he was suing nef.

Ian is ripping me off. Here's the scam accusation thread. Please weigh in there:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133362.0

I did not know that Ian was also under fire for other stuff like misrepresenting shareholder votes. But, if he owns shares he bought legally (there's no way he bought 50% of his company though) then he should have the right to vote. Unless he is using stolen/free/issued/unpaid-for shares to act against the best interests of paying shareholders... In that case please post whatever you have to the scam accusation thread above.