... Unfortunately no one can transfer their direct shares into Havelock at the moment  The lark’s on the wing; The snail’s on the thorn; God’s in His heaven-- All’s right with the world! |
|
|
|
...
Again you show an utter lack of knowledge... Wouldn't go that far. Brother sells "silver-backed hashes." That alone shows me he has an insightful & nuanced understanding of the Bitcoin community. |
|
|
|
... Look at the securities sub of this forum and tell me your libertardian buddies are mature enough to go potty on their own Never been there, but let them loose in peace, no one has to defend their loss, nor taking their gains. You should check it out brah, a libertarian laissez-faire paradise, already in progress. Don't miss out on the hilarity & make monyz selling off-brand Kleenex & butthole salves (which, of course you'll never deliver, this being Bitcoin & all). |
|
|
|
... The board IS the company.
Yeah, it's all there in the company charter, on pastebin. Good morning, fellow moguls of finance & captains of industry! |
|
|
|
...
If FC is kidnapped then it should be reported to the police. If he is being held against his permission in a foreign country it becomes a national matter for china...
People's Liberation Army Air Force being scrambled as we speak!  |
|
|
|
>But we are not against delegating our decision if it is by one's free will. Welcome to representative democracy. Grab a beer. >A libertarian don't have to revolt to practice, just making business with his own rules while mitigating what force can get out of him. No. He must follow the rules of the state. He may not believe in taxation, yet acting on those beliefs would make him a criminal. That's unfortunate fact number one  Unfortunate fact number two is this: Our IRL state, unlike your libertarian Equestria, has mechanisms in place for enforcing its laws. Like throwing his criminal butt in prison. Which means that unless "his own rules" coincide perfectly with our rules, he's gunna have a bad time >So yes, if someone want to take a bad decision for himself, the libertarian will let him explore the reality by himself. >The analogy of the child >How can you defend that the bureaucrat knows better whether his citizen will get hurt if he acts on his free will ? Pop quiz: Your next door neighbor, the other creepy Bitcoiner, invites your seven-year-old kid for a sleepover. She, thrilled by the promised free candy and ice cream for breakfast, decides to take him up on it... You, being a proponent of personal choice & right to make own mistakes, bid her a bon voyage & exchange a few pleasantries with your creepy neighbor. Right? You wouldn't say "Pumpkin, Daddy knows something you don't, it's not such a good idea"? inb4 "not mature enough to make choice": Duh. Look at the securities sub of this forum and tell me your libertardian buddies are mature enough to go potty on their own. >Such great argument, I am speechless indeed. I felt expansive, and "hahahahaha!" seemed a bit too formal & dry. |
|
|
|
|
What makes you so ...idk, so ..."jimmothy"? How is it you haven't died of embarrassment yet?
What's wrong with you, bro?
|
|
|
|
Basically, you wouldn't kick a baby for not knowing how to talk, would you?
No. A bit hesitant to say same of the situation here: grown men sticking head in sand & ass in air, over and over, surprised each and every time @ what happens next. ...at risk of stating the obvious - sometimes it takes a while to learn a lesson. My point is that perhaps we're doing something great here, something as revolutionary as the cryptocurrency space itself... we've fostered a fertile breeding ground for sandy haired, strong and wide buttholed more growned men. You should congratulate yourself on your efforts to guide these fellow lambs away from the slaughter. I don't deserve congratulations. I've failed to instill even a modicum of learningz in Bitcoin investment enthusiasts. Because ineducable. Because I've seen lab rats bananas more open to learning than the average Bitcoiner. Because, against the sound advice of the Good Book, I've cast my pearls before swine. I blame it on my bleeding egalitarian heart (it's two sizes too large!), I blame it on overflowing compassion for the mentally-cheated & downtrodden. I blame it on my loving nature & unbridled optimism. But enough excuses! I'm man enough to admit it: I have no cause to celebrate [Screaming Continues] I've failed you, my wizard. I've failed you, my president. [Elinore's Screams Continue] [Thunder Crashing] |
|
|
|
Lolno. No more than kids will demand to be fed spinach or dentist visits.
And what would the whining of poor people do about free education anyhow? They can demand free education or free crack, how exactly do you see them getting either? This is the root of the statist philosophy. That people are dumb and irresponsible and that we need higher people to protect them, which are not subject to these problems. It gives you a moral duty to force them doing what you deem morally good, without thinking about their own code of value that you consider as inferior and mistaken. That's the root of libertardian philosophy--thinking that you are somehow smart enough to decide for yourself. Looking at you poor rubes getting [repeatedly] assraped in securities section tells me that you're not yet smart enough to be trusted with lunch money, forget setting up a cohesive society. "Statist" lol. You mean the ENTIRE WORLD? For the entire recorded history of mankind? Because the entire surface of this planet is divvied up amongst nation states, and not a scrap of libertardian land exists. Why is that, would you guess? Weak? Unable to compete with your statist betters?  But if they choose to buy crack : where can they get crack without money ?
By violence ?
However, violence is way more costly than peaceful collaboration.
In other word, if your goal is to get crack, then it is best to get it by collaboration than violence.
No. Much easier to sell crack to your kids & *then* rob them, rape them, and shoot them in the face. You clearly don't get out much. Then you would point out : Why is there gang cartels who are driven by violence, not by collaboration ?
Only if I wanted to listen to you regurgitate yet another rancid chunk of leftover liber pap you've been fed on stormfront some other reactionary crackpot website like mises.org or zerohedge. No thanks.  |
|
|
|
...
Why bother embassies. Just go to the UN!
Fun Cat Fact: Cats steal. At times, cooperatively.  |
|
|
|
... it is needed, people will demand to get it anyway, by definition.
Lolno. No more than kids will demand to be fed spinach or dentist visits. And what would the whining of poor people do about free education anyhow? They can demand free education or free crack, how exactly do you see them getting either? |
|
|
|
^ Lol, okay. I'm pretty sure they're starting to get it all on their own, but an extra reminder can't hurt. If you think you can add to the fun, you go right ahead |
|
|
|
...We will have our lawyers there in Shenzhen doing it properly...
No. You will talk about it, you will try to get others to do it, you might even start a chat room or irc chan, hell you might even use TorChat with The Dome Of Silence, but you will not have your lawyer (lol, missed the plural, your lawyerS ) "there in Shenzhen doing it properly." You ain't even got *one* I would have to agree that he will not get them sued. I would guess it would cost more than his investment to even try. But that's the the basic tenet of cons like this: Do't pull them on people with power/lawyers/money. If a few get snared despite reasonable precautions, treat shit symptomatically. Pay dangerous ones to go away, discreetly. |
|
|
|
...The point is that even if it was a bonafide scam, which I don't know for sure, then Havelock would just take zero ownership and responsibility of that fact.
You're basically on your own and have no more guarantee than the word of whoever offers their "virtual stock" to you.
I'm not on my own, I have exactly 0 money at stake, because smarter than a fruit fly. It's you who is on your own. I won't even raise a finger to feed lightbox to the lions, I'm enjoying this too much |
|
|
|
...
I disagree. Havelock has cristal clear rules and they take no responsibility for anything but listing, trades and dividend distribution. In the mintspare case, what do you suggest they do? Just give shareholders escrowed funds? That's not how it works.
Havelock also makes it crystal clear in its TOS that it doe not deal with US citizens. Both of the offerings which have not tanked (Matt's and Benny's) have been issued by US nationals from US soil. So yeah... Re. "fail rates well within range for 1st year startups": Well no, they're not, but even if startups had such abysmal rates, how many IRL start-ups simply OKTHXBAI from their creditors? What do you mean "not tanked"? There are several listings that are alive and well (Crypto financial, Casino Bitcoin etc) ... CryptoFinancial (ticker:CFI) Price @IPO: .15 Price now: .04 Dividends paid: ZERO. Casino Bitcoin (ticker:CBTC) price @IPO .00012 to .00018 price now: .00005025  Now I'm not talking about an occasional scam on a field of virgin win, I'm talking about wall-to-wall scam, as in NeoBee and Basic Mining level shit. And the thing is, I'm just saddened by the childlike artlessness of it all (The Panama Fund, Imagine? ), not the fact that he took your lunch money. |
|
|
|
...We will have our lawyers there in Shenzhen doing it properly...
No. You will talk about it, you will try to get others to do it, you might even start a chat room or irc chan, hell you might even use TorChat with The Dome Of Silence, but you will not have your lawyer (lol, missed the plural, your lawyerS ) "there in Shenzhen doing it properly." You ain't even got *one* |
|
|
|
...
I disagree. Havelock has cristal clear rules and they take no responsibility for anything but listing, trades and dividend distribution. In the mintspare case, what do you suggest they do? Just give shareholders escrowed funds? That's not how it works.
Havelock also makes it crystal clear in its TOS that it doe not deal with US citizens. Both of the offerings which have not tanked (Matt's and Benny's) have been issued by US nationals from US soil. So yeah... Re. "fail rates well within range for 1st year startups": Well no, they're not, but even if startups had such abysmal rates, how many IRL start-ups simply OKTHXBAI from their creditors? |
|
|
|
...
You can't protect investors from scams 100%.
Not 100%? The selection on Havelock is 100% scam or, at best, simple fail. Only two exceptions: Matt's betting operation, (B.EXCH; B.MINE; B.SELL), and Branny's RENT (which is above IPO, most likely another pre-NthPO pump). The rest selling way below IPO and/or ran. For instance, Havelock swore up and down that it's holding 100 BTC in escrow for MintSpare (ticker:MS). The issuer hasn't been heard from for half a year or more (longer than friedcat), the price tanked (much like here), and Havelock is ...doing what Havelock does best, ignoring & denying. MS market cap, BTW, is vacillating between 6 and 12 BTC, substantially short of the alleged 100 held in in escrow by Havelock. Not that Havelock's own ...offering, Havelock Investment Fund (ticker:HIF) is doing much better. Nope, tanked hard and never paid divs So yeah, somewhat less than 100% scam protection. Especially considering recent past like Basic Mining & NeoBee. Such concentration of fail being purely due to chance is nearly impossible. Not unless Bitcoine4rs are an order of magnitude dumber & suckier @ business than regular people. ~Happy Investing! |
|
|
|
Is there any clue why such person, a partner in business would steal the miners.
There should be a serious conflict between them.
Might the partner be someone illegal entity like a mobster?
...
 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
