Why don't you make me a moderator Theymos?
Is it because I would actually ban some of the slimeball fucks who infest these forums?
Sorry to burst your bubble, Vampire Princess, but Moderators don't have ban powers. They would if I was a moderator. I would be very fair. Right now, there's no one on my ban list, for example. |
|
|
|
I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc".
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people, how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc. Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.
So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828Stop spamming the forums with your bullshit propaganda, EskimoBob. Your cut-and-paste campaigns are really annoying. Yes, we can read. |
|
|
|
I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc".
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people, how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc. Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.
So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828Why are you spamming the forums, EskimoBob? |
|
|
|
I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc".
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people, how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc. Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.
So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828Lol dude wtf? Why did you post the same message three friggen times? Stop spamming the forums you loser. What, are you really being paid to post here? Looks like it. |
|
|
|
|
Smickles and I have come to a private agreement, which while partially conducted in email and on IRC, was also partially conducted in PM on these forums -- sufficiently enough that I have no need or desire to release any further info and have no need of posting on this thread anymore because the appropriate people already have all the info they need.
Therefore case closed, not a scammer.
Thread can be closed and locked now thanks.
|
|
|
|
theymos... but what would you take as an evidence? I mean what do you think the police wold take as evidence when the police would care about bitcoins. They would use the exact same info. So i dont fully get why you did this.
Would you give out the details when #bitcoin-police checked the traces in database and ask you for evidence? Otherwise bitcoinuser would be in disadvantage to real world user again. Because btc isnt real money for the real police yet.
My current policy is to release IPs only in these cases: - Police send me convincing evidence that someone is guilty. I then release IPs to the police only. (This has happened.) - A court with jurisdiction over the forum sends me a subpoena that isn't obviously unjust. (This has not happened.) - A scammer is absolutely proven to be guilty and stops reasonably negotiating with his victims. - Someone is repeatedly evading bans. The accused person in the GLBSE case wasn't absolutely proven to be guilty, and wasn't even given a chance to respond to the allegations. Nefario never went to the police as far as I know. I'm not sure whether I should release IPs at all, really. I'd like to see a discussion about the morality of this. Releasing IPs enables people to act violently toward the accused person, either in person or through police. Is it really right to commit violence against someone just because he did something non-violently over the Internet? I'm not sure. Services should ideally be set up so that scamming is impossible and as a result no one is ever tempted toward violence. You are aware of far more than you let on. The person in question is (and was) currently operating a business on these forums that is highly succeptable to fraud. The person in question has long since admitted his guilt and returned, according to both you and others, a substantial (but possibly not total) sum of the money he took. Said person does not have a scammer tag and has to my knowledge not yet been revealed. This situation was handled extremely irresponsibly by all parties involved. In particular, now that it's public knowledge, I will comment on the fact that you as an officer of GLBSE and majority shareholder failed to act in the best interests of GLBSE and use your power to help catch the person in question. As a result of that you delayed and endangered GLBSE user funds. As someone who lost over $10,000 of personal money when GLBSE shut down I guess I have a lot of misdirected upsetness. You need to wake up theymos and realize the position you find yourself in is not one which sits well with a lassiez-faire attitude. You are a poor moderator. You need to think, and to make some just decisions around here. This forum needs justice. Why don't you dish some out? In the case of MPOE-PR paying people to troll on these forums I want you to think very carefully about this next bit. These forums contain several extremely well documented cases where people have experienced financial loss as a direct result of trolling done on these forums. If you want to see police orders in no short order I can promise you, one day you will. I don't mean on you I mean on others. Why don't you do what is right and not let that kind of thing happen in the first place? I've lost contracts as a direct result of the trolling on these forums. Think about that for a moment. I can easily demonstrate directly related financial damages. That is ample grounds for libel and slander cases -- i'm talking real high class stuff here. Malicious criminal slander. You need to police these forums or hire someone to do it proper. Why don't you make me a moderator Theymos? Is it because I would actually ban some of the slimeball fucks who infest these forums? Think for a moment what that says about your forum moderation policy. Please. |
|
|
|
Now, how about you -- are you trying to scam us here? Just answer the question and stop being a dick, EskimoBob.
No, I am not trying to scam you nor anyone else here. Usagi, stop being a dick now. Oh come now EskimoBob! You should know better than anyone -- I'm not being a dick, I'm merely... asking questions! Isn't that what you like to call it? This is anew contract (draft)
All grammar corrections are welcome.
Sale of ART-OTC virtual Support Tokens
This is a rewards-based crowdfunding project. Project supporters (aka buyer of ART-OTC issue of virtual Support Tokens - ST’s) are offered, as a reward, the virtual Support Tokens.
As a perk to ST holders, virtual tokens can be used at later date for discounts on product and services offered by the project in the future. No equity is offered to ST holders.
By selling something with the promise of future value, for an unspecified product or service, you are creating a security. If you are honestly trying not to scam people, just sell pre-orders. There is no law that says a commissioned product must be completed within 30 days (as some have suggested). A. WHY AND WHAT IS OFFERED
1. ART-OTC virtual Support Tokens (later: STs) represents your participation in the "Open Art Shop Project ART-OTC" as a supporter by helping us to purchase new equipment for the project
2. Proceeds from the sale of virtual Support Tokens are used to buy equipment, materials, parts and cover other equipment related expenses.
3. Equipment will be insured against the theft or destruction by fire or similar incident.
4. Equipment is used to generate additional income for the project.
5. Most of the equipment is usable for long periods of time (years).
6. Up to 34 000 virtual Support Tokens will be sold at 0.05 BTC per token.
7. Support Tokens do not represent any share (equity) in "Open Art Shop Project" or in its managing entity(s).
8. Support Tokens are not financial securities nor do they represent any financial security whatsoever.
Never put a clause like #8 in a contract. I'm sure guruvan or some lawyer will chip in and tell you why, but in general it's a little like saying "We will not murder anyone on, before, or after July 19th, 2015." 9. The project does not promise any profits and there will be no profit sharing with holders of virtual ART-OTC Support Tokens.
10. If the purchased equipment is sold at later date, proceeds will be divided up between token owners at that time.
11. ARTS-OTC Support Tokens can (but do not have to) be bought back by the issuer.
Clauses #10 and #11 states that token holders control equity because they have rights to the equipment. B . LIMITATIONS TO STs BUYERS
1. If your (STs buyer) annual income or the net worth of is less than USD 100000, your maximum aggregate purchase of STs in 12 month period can not exceed the greater of USD 2000 or 5 percent of your annual income.
2. If your annual income or the net worth of is more than USD 100,000, your maximum aggregate purchase of STs in 12 month period can not exceed 10 percent of your annual income.
Meaningless and unenforceable. C. RISKS
1. By purchasing any number of STs you positively affirm that you understand that you are in risking of losing your entire investment -
Investment? 2. and that you could bear such a loss; and
'Investors' cannot have a loss if their tokens do not represent equity. Sorry EskimoBob but it's pretty clear you are trying to sell a fake (scam) security here. 3. you understand the level of risk generally applicable to investments in startups, emerging businesses, and small issuers;
4. and you understand the risk of illiquidity
Illiquidity? Why don't you just come out and say your tokens will be traded on a secondary market? Hot shit EskimoBob, you're selling a security here. 5. If the project fails, ART-OTC Support Tokens issuer or project manager (persons or legal entity(s) can not be held liable.
6. Issuer can not be held liable for any of STs holders actions or for any of the results from STs holders actions.
7. Issuer can not be held liable for STs holders actions like selling, trading, destroying or anything else you (STs holder) plan or can imagine doing with your STs.
Lol you're insane. So let me get this straight. If I sold a security and said people were not allowed to trade it or I would not be responsible.. that would be okay? You can't be that stupid. D. FORCE MAJEURE
1. Issuer or manager(s) shall not be liable for any failure to perform its obligations where such failure is as a result of Acts of Nature (including fire, flood, earthquake, storm, hurricane or other natural disaster), war, invasion, act of foreign enemies, hostilities (whether war is declared or not), civil war, rebellion, revolution, insurrection, military or usurped power or confiscation, terrorist activities, nationalisation, government sanction, blockage, embargo, labour dispute, strike, lockout or interruption or failure of electricity [or telephone service], and no other Party will have a right to terminate this Agreement under Clause 19 (Termination) in such circumstances."
Pay careful attention people because this is where EskimoBob is blatantly attempting to scam you. After he sells these "tokens" all he has to do is say "oh look.. it's illegal. silly me!" and you will have NO RECOURSE AGAINST HIM. Watch out! You were warned... EskimoBob is a scammer!
2. Any Party asserting Force Majeure as an excuse shall have the burden of proving that reasonable steps were taken (under the circumstances) to minimize delay or damages caused by foreseeable events, that all non-excused obligations were substantially fulfilled, and that the other Party was timely notified of the likelihood or actual occurrence which would justify such an assertion, so that other prudent precautions could be contemplated.
... like not even trying to pull this bullshit in the first place. This is a nice peice of work EB, too bad no one will buy your scam asset. |
|
|
|
Wow, Clipse was a scammer huh. Go figure! ROTFL
I guess it doesn't help that Clipse has a really bad rep on IRC for being a jerk. |
|
|
|
The one exploit that accepted negative share values to be traded was interesting. Nefario lied about this in the interview. Not sure why, but he lied about the timing of the attack. |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the scammer tag is not a form of arbitration, it's a warning to others.
There's nothing in arbitration clauses which prevents people from publicly discussing their disputes. To the extent which arbitration clauses are enforceable (which varies by jurisdiction), they only set out agreement regarding the legal procedures for dispute resolution. If arbitration clauses acted as gag orders, you'd never see any criticism of PayPal posted.
+1 I agree with the scammer tag being a warning to others. Usagi is a double talking scammy fuck who should come with a warning. This has been proven countless times across many threads. ( Side note: I also went through some bullshit with Usagi and ended up getting the fucking runaround as well.) How are those 7970s hashing btw? Ian, answer the question. Is BAKEWELL a scam? |
|
|
|
No, you're a nobody, and I'm not a scammer. Fuck off.
Scammer. Get lost. I caught you in multiple lies dear wacko shemale. No you didn't. |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the scammer tag is not a form of arbitration, it's a warning to others.
There's nothing in arbitration clauses which prevents people from publicly discussing their disputes. To the extent which arbitration clauses are enforceable (which varies by jurisdiction), they only set out agreement regarding the legal procedures for dispute resolution. If arbitration clauses acted as gag orders, you'd never see any criticism of PayPal posted.
+1 I agree with the scammer tag being a warning to others. Usagi is a double talking scammy fuck who should come with a warning. This has been proven countless times across many threads. ( Side note: I also went through some bullshit with Usagi and ended up getting the fucking runaround as well.) You lied to me and said you were experiencing financial difficulty in PM to try to close out your contract. These PMs are on record and mods can read them. When that didn't work you tried to "simply break" a contract with a no-cancellation clause, published in your thread, because you heard I didn't have the money or some other BS reason. Then you tried to jack your shareholders out of the money, in clear violation of same contract which stated the money would be returned to your shareholders. You made a big stink about it. Then you started following me around and being a real fucking assshole. Here's a clue, shit for brains: Out of all the bullshit you've heaped on the four, what, five scam accusation threads against me, I don't have a scammer tag. Do you know why? It's because you're a fucking troll, and I'm not a scammer. Think about it. You're a Canadian, you have a brain. Shouldn't be too hard. A couple things in closing; #1 -- You lied to me about your financial situation with BAKEWELL for the purposes of financial gain. Therefore, you have committed fraud. This is very very clear. #2 -- You have demonstrated that I have experienced financial loss as a direct result of the trolling here (both through YOU, and due to YOU). #3 -- I paid BAKEWELL shareholders back and you have no reason to bother me here. Think about that very carefully please. |
|
|
|
Usagi, I guess you leave me no other option.
Except, of course, just simply telling us how do we know you're not trying to scam us?Naw, that would be too easy right? You'd rather try (and fail) to make this about me. For start, there are multiple threads demanding you get a scammer tag. LOL! I mean, wtf have you done to deserve this? (do not answer, we all know)
No it's ok, I'll answer. You started the first one, in retaliation for a scam accusation I made against YOU, because you broke a contract you agreed to seven times. There were multiple witnesses, some of which posted on the thread. Unfortunately Maged felt you didn't deserve a scammer tag. But in retaliation, yes, you did post the first one. The others were all posted by trolls like puppet and nimda who had a history of trolling (and, in my threads specifically). Look around EskimoBob -- despite all those scam threads on me you and your friends started, I still don't have a scammer tag. Why is that, I wonder? Now, how about you -- are you trying to scam us here? Just answer the question and stop being a dick, EskimoBob.BTW usagi, you are not welcome here, in this thread. Consider this as a local rule (you invented it btw) and please, just go away.
No, that's not a local rule, and the world deserves to know what kind of person you are. Consider it Karma. Yes, I am trying to build something that can last for years to come and make lots of people happy and give them opportunity to learn something new.
Prove it. Introduce us to your friends. Show us some of their art. Do anything but try to insult me. Or are you a fraud? For everyone else, I am sorry if you decided to read this.
Lets get back to the real topic at hand and figure out, how we can make this work.
How about you tell people, quite simply, how they can believe you're not trying to scam them after all this crap you've written about other people? Everyone go read the scam thread against EskimoBob and decide for yourselves, and consider deeply how EskimoBob has lied and obfuscated, and avoided answering a rather simple question whether or not he has any proof what he is doing is real. I think I know what your decision will be. |
|
|
|
Please keep in mind, that those are not shares, bonds, notes or what ever other instrument you can name. Support Tokens are not registered in any known country because those are not securities.
You are purchasing virtual Support Tokens.
You're trying to sell securities, and what you are doing is illegal, by your own words. Just because you don't call it a "bond" or a "share" means nothing in the eyes of the law -- according to you. This smells like a scam. Or an idiot For once, I agree with you usagi  EskimoBob, either you're just a fool, or you really don't get it. Assets-OTC isn't the one 1. Soliciting Investment for a business (you are) 2. Selling an unregistered security (are you really to stupid to figure this out?) 3. Lying about the nature of the security (you're lying when you say it's not a security!) 4. Failing to disclose any of the risks associated with the investment (You didn't disclose ANY risk!) 5. Failing to disclose the true nature of the art studio's business & sources of income (seriously) EskimoBob, either you're trying to take advantage of investors, or you're just being fucking stupid if you fail to realize that, according to the SEC's definition of "security" you're selling securities in this art studio. You either adamantly refuse to learn, or you understand and are lying and scamming. I'm not necessarily against unregistered, or even illegally sold, securities, but I sure hope that the people selling them KNOW what the fuck they're doing, rather than what you're doing which is refusing to recognize the truth and failing to inform investors of the risks associated with your issue, especially the risks associated with selling securities illegally. I guess I am as stupid (idiot?) as every "issuer" in this forum including troll Usagi. Only difference is that all those nice issuers are advertising their stuff as a security. What makes this whining here even more absurd, is that has never bothered any of you This is strange, or what? Guruvan, if you think this art studio is a banana and this banana is a security, then have fun and believe what you want. I can not stop you Guruvan, risk are written in few first posts. Cheers The fact is... based on the above you are lying about the nature of what you are doing, for the purpose of financial gain. You sir, are a fraud. |
|
|
|
So you intend(ed) to pay back a CPA/personal loan with hardware paid for and owned by BMF shareholders (who already owe 500+ BTC from CPA) and somehow that proves.. what? Think. Try it! I reiterate that nimda's accusation in the OP is frivolous and without merit, and this thread should be locked/closed. |
|
|
|
posting a link to a statement that I will be recieving hardware to counter claims by deprived I was trying to hide that fact
FTFY. Now fuck off cap'n. You have nothing important to say. |
|
|
|
...GLBSE was only a market. All the stuff sold there was not legal in USA - basically everything offered in this forum.
Didn't you just say you would have listed on the GLBSE had it not gone down? LOL. Trolling? Usagi, pleas, get your facts straight and then try again. You have completely failed to understand what was GLBSE's role. Again, this is a wrong thread for this. Lets talk about it somewhere else. Remember, "Local rule"  EskimoBob has demonstrated his hypocrisy in this response quite well. Why doesn't he just address the issue that he said himself what he is doing is illegal? Does the OP even make sense considering what EskimoBob said in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118208.0?Why are you people so happy buying fake and illegal securities in non existing (fake) entities?
Why even issue this illegal stuff and call yourself a corporation, while you know, you are not representing any legally existing Co.
If your company is registered, and you offer shares to general public - you are breaking the laws in most of the countries that have internet access.
Obviously this opens the ugly door of SEC/FSA/OSC/... etc, who will start cracking down on this sooner or later and make everyone's life really miserable.
|
|
|
|
You're trying to sell securities, and what you are doing is illegal, by your own words. Just because you don't call it a "bond" or a "share" means nothing in the eyes of the law -- according to you.
This smells like a scam.
Really usagi? I am informing project supporters that those are NOT securities. Tell me (not here, because your own invention, the local rule, applies to you) how did you present CPA, NYAN, BMF etc? LOL. EskimoBob avoids talking about whether what he is doing is legal or not *(it's illegal) and instead tries to obfuscate the situation by attacking me for using the GLBSE. What I did or did not do is irrelevant (I stopped what I was doing because of my beliefs on the subject); the question here is if what EskimoBob is doing is illegal. And, it is. Why doesn't he just address the question? Or is he really doing this in full knowledge that he is breaking the law -- by his own words? [/quote] |
|
|
|
How do we know you're not just trying to scam us? You are well-known for lying and trolling on these forums, why should anyone help you?
Hello usagi. Is that your retaliation for exposing you as one of the most incompetent managers? Sorry, truth hurts. How many times do I need to ask you for the link to a article where I have lied. Instead of simply answering my question, EskimoBob attacks me and tries to change the topic. I didn't accuse him of lying, I simply said he is a well-known liar (which is true). If EskimoBob had nothing to hide, he would answer my simple question: How do we know he's not just trying to scam us? |
|
|
|
...GLBSE was a only a market. All the stuff sold there was not legal in USA - basically everything offered in this forum.
Didn't you just say you would have listed on the GLBSE had it not gone down? So let me get this straight. You want us to believe that your business is legal simply because it's not listed on the GLBSE? Be careful people. Moderators do not remove likely scams (see the warning above). And this meets all the requirements of a likely scam. Think about it. EskimoBob is collecting money for a friend to use setting up an art studio. And he's promising to pay 3% a month? I have a bridge in brooklyn I'd LOVE to sell you. This has scam written ALL over it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
