Everyone read what EskimoBob just wrote: "This is simply a fraud".

When will people learn?

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.

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?

You honestly think that people have to listen to you or even care and that I will just answer any question you ask?

GL with that lol.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110122.msg1246650#msg1246650

Do you have ANY idea how fucking dumb you are, deprived?

You made this thread in full knowledge of two shareholder motions discussing the points I made in the OP (of the message you quoted). In short you're full of shit, nimda.

Don't you get it nimda? Your accusation is retarded, it never had any merit, and you look like an idiot now.

Lol just fuck off dude. You got nothing, and the best you can do is necroaccount and necrothread.

The book end of things is nearing completion and I'm still looking for art. If you or anyone you know can draw, please drop me a line.

Exactly. I've said many times I'll be passing along claim codes for shares.

Like I said -- no fucking clue. Why did you post that screenshot? Are you trying to make yourself look stupid? What are you trying to prove?

Then this entire forum and all it's mods are full of shit.

Yes, let's be very clear. Fuck off, puppet. If you have screenshots, go ahead and make an ass of yourself by posting them. Make sure you post the whole contract so we can see exactly what my obligation is in this situation. We're all waiting.

I reiterate that Nimda's accusation in the OP is frivolous and without merit and that this thread should be closed by a moderator.

What coins are you referring to? Client's coins; yes, I will definately be keeping my client's coins that they paid, and completing my obligation to them. The only remaining client I am aware of is ABM, who prepaid for a year on insurance for one FPGA single. So yes, I will be keeping PsychoticBoy's coins, why on earth would I give them back?

Investor's coins --> See this is why you are a fucktard. First, I *just* said I will be paying back the loans I took out. So you can't read. Second point, I *just* said that everything we had was invested on GLBSE, and I will be distributing claim codes as I get them. So what's your problem? Are you mentally retarded?


"AFAIR" -- ya but we've *just* seen you have issues remembering posts you're replying to let alone ones made 2 or 3 up from that. So your AFAIR isn't worth shit. And you clearly have no clue who our clients or what our contracts were.

I reiterate that Nimda's claim in the OP is frivolous and without merit, and that this thread should be closed by a moderator.

Everything we had was listed on the GLBSE. As soon as I'm given claim codes (or whatever) by Nefario I will distribute them to former shareholders.

I've been in contact with some of the larger shareholders so far and they've been made aware of the situation.

I mean take BITCOINRS, NASTY and oh, say, BTC-MINING for example. As soon as they refund the money I paid for the x amount of shares we held, I'll be happy to pass it along.

I will now reiterate that Nimda's accusation in the OP is total bullshit and this thread should be closed by a moderator.

No I did not JUST do that. I did it last week, because I'm sick of your bullshit. Everything I say and do on here is twisted by you and your cronies into some kind of scam accusation. Fuck you. I wrote a letter to shareholders saying I was going to do this. My presence on these forums is over because of retards just like you.

And I did not delete ALL my posts. Notably I left open the post regarding the loans I took out because I intend to pay them back.

It's not you, it's just mining bonds and mining in general. GIGAMINING had 40,000 shares outstanding last time I checked, and fell from 1.50 to .50. That's 40,000 bitcoins, or half a million dollars at $12.50/coin. I just used your statistic because it's the only one I could remember off the top of my head. The point is that it's no one's fault. It was the bitcoin price increase. Bitcoins are worth more now, so it takes fewer bitcoins to buy the same hardware. This is why mining bonds suffered.

No, you're an idiot.


I have an idea, stop fucking trying to turn it around on me, go bother gigavps or meni. Here's a clue. GIGAVPS lost 40,000 bitcoins (half a million fucking dollars) of investor money. I merely invested in a broad range of companies like gigamining. Investors made their own decisions. And you're damned right I edit my posts. This isn't a damned newspaper.

While I can comprehend the idea that "unregistered securities" are "illegal" in the United States and the UK, the question here is what happens when you are not operating in one of those jurisdictions but instead you are on the internet, and/or in another country. For example, chewing gum in public might be illegal in Singapore, but they will hardly extradite a Jamaican natural living in France all the way to Singapore to put you on trial for chewing gum.

Before anyone panics and says "we're all doomed!" the SEC regulations provide a remedy:

If you are already engaged in the business and are not yet registered, you should cease all activities until you are properly registered.

So right off the top, if you/me anyone simply stops post haste, once being made aware of the legal status of what you are doing, you should be fine. This is likely what Nefario was told and what he did (although that is speculation on my part).

The question is, then, is it? Is this illegal? And if so, where? As for me, I'm not a U.S. citizen and I don't live in the USA. But there are two passages from the SEC regulations which seem to be important which i'd like to quote here for the benefit of my U.S. friends:

-----begin-quote-----
5. Issuer's "Exemption" and Associated Persons of Issuers (Rule 3a4-1)

Issuers generally are not "brokers" because they sell securities for their own accounts and not for the accounts of others. Moreover, issuers generally are not "dealers" because they do not buy and sell their securities for their own accounts as part of a regular business. Issuers whose activities go beyond selling their own securities, however, need to consider whether they would need to register as broker-dealers. This includes issuers that purchase their securities from investors, as well as issuers that effectively operate markets in their own securities or in securities whose features or terms can change or be altered. The so-called issuer's exemption does not apply to the personnel of a company who routinely engage in the business of effecting securities transactions for the company or related companies (such as general partners seeking investors in limited partnerships). The employees and other related persons of an issuer who assist in selling its securities may be "brokers," especially if they are paid for selling these securities and have few other duties.

Exchange Act Rule 3a4-1 provides that an associated person (or employee) of an issuer who participates in the sale of the issuer's securities would not have to register as a broker-dealer if that person, at the time of participation: (1) is not subject to a "statutory disqualification," as defined in Section 3(a)(39) of the Act; (2) is not compensated by payment of commissions or other remuneration based directly or indirectly on securities transactions; (3) is not an associated person of a broker or dealer; and (4) limits its sales activities as set forth in the rule.

Some issuers offer dividend reinvestment and stock purchase programs. Under certain conditions, an issuer may purchase and sell its own securities through a dividend reinvestment or stock purchase program without registering as a broker-dealer. These conditions, regarding solicitation, fees and expenses, and handling of participants' funds and securities, are explained in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35041 (December 1, 1994), 59 FR 63393 ("1994 STA Letter"). Although Regulation M2 replaced Rule 10b-6 and superseded the 1994 STA Letter, the staff positions taken in this letter regarding the application of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act remain in effect. See 17 CFR 242.102(c) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38067 (December 20, 1996), 62 FR 520, 532 n.100 (January 3, 1997).

6. Foreign Broker-Dealer Exemption (Rule 15a-6)

The SEC generally uses a territorial approach in applying registration requirements to the international operations of broker-dealers. Under this approach, all broker-dealers physically operating within the United States that induce or attempt to induce securities transactions must register with the SEC, even if their activities are directed only to foreign investors outside of the United States. In addition, foreign broker-dealers that, from outside of the United States, induce or attempt to induce securities transactions by any person in the United States, or that use the means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce of the United States for this purpose, also must register. This includes the use of the internet to offer securities, solicit securities transactions, or advertise investment services to U.S. persons. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39779 (March 23, 1998) http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/33-7516.htm.

Foreign broker-dealers that limit their activities to those permitted under Rule 15a-6 of the Act, however, may be exempt from U.S. broker-dealer registration. Foreign broker-dealers that wish to rely on this exemption should review Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27017 (effective August 15, 1989), 54 FR 30013, to determine whether they meet the conditions of Rule 15a-6. See also letters re: Securities Activities of U.S.-Affiliated Foreign Dealers (April 9 and April 28, 1997). In addition, in April 2005, the Division of Market Regulation staff issued responses to frequently asked questions concerning Rule 15a-6 in relation to Regulation AC. See http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/mregacfaq0803.htm#partb. (Regulation AC is discussed in Part V.B, below.)

-----end-quote-----

The two interesting passages to me are one, "Issuers whose activities go beyond selling their own securities, however, need to consider whether they would need to register as broker-dealers. This includes issuers that purchase their securities from investors, as well as issuers that effectively operate markets in their own securities or in securities whose features or terms can change or be altered."

and two, "In addition, foreign broker-dealers that, from outside of the United States, induce or attempt to induce securities transactions by any person in the United States, or that use the means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce of the United States for this purpose, also must register. This includes the use of the internet to offer securities, solicit securities transactions, or advertise investment services to U.S. persons."

To me this seems to mean that operating the GLBSE or listing assets would only be illegal if you were physically located in the USA. Of course, the US has laws which prohibit it's citizens from committing crimes while they are abroad; but if you're not a US citizen and not physically present in the USA, it seems that the only way to be guilty of a crime is to sell secutiries to people living in the USA.

Opinions/comments?

So what you're saying is you have absolutely no proof, after all this time, but you are determined to trash me and my companies every chance you get, in the hopes that I'll actually scam someone?

So in other words I haven't done anything scammy yet? Oh this just keeps getting better and better.

Yes. I say, let's do it.

If anyone is interested in this we can arrange for them to run it for 1, 2, 3 months, or even permanently. We don't even need to motion on it because the business operation and contracts would not change.

Sure, I'll step down. Let someone else run the company and do a better job.

Because you got trolled. Everything I did was according to my contracts, I published everything I did and wrote letters to shareholders. Before this little trollfest took root I was getting compliments, daily, for how I was running CPA, NYAN and BMF.

Get it? I don't have a scammer tag because I'm not a scammer.