|
The only people you find complaining on Bitcointalk for the most part are competitors or known trolls like Entropy, Bicknellski, etc...
To answer your question though: No there is nothing valid they bring to the table that qualifies as a scam. Just angry butt hurt trolls who can't stand the fact that all their idiotic "predictions" and false claims turned out to be lies and they are exposed for what they are. So they try to flood the threads and forum with more junk in hopes that people will forget.
|
|
|
|
|
All states, miaviator.
After checking into it this, it looks like we've never actually been served directly. We are investigating the issue further, but it explains why this is the first we've heard of it. We're still trying to figure out who they actually served (if anyone), but it apparently wasn't us. Unfortunately, the legal system moves a bit slow.
|
|
|
|
I don't think this is an integrity issue on gmaxwell's part. I think he created his moderation rules at a time where scam accusations were limited to individuals that were scamming people out of Bitcoin, not corporate entities that are engaging in questionable/misleading practices. BFL, and now HashFast, have presented issues which do not fit into the framework initially established and now gmaxwell is feeling pressured to honor the existing (obsolete) rules that he established with a situation that does not cleanly fit into the rules.
Rules need to adapt with changing times. They cannot be inflexible and expected to be honored. Every rules system has a framework for amendment.
There are going to be more entities which produce custom hardware and the business practices associated with said entity need to be presented as a package, not splintered across the forum for some outdated forum organization. The fact is that if you intend propose, design, produce, modify, distribute and support hardware which has only one function - to mine bitcoin hardware - there needs to be a place to discuss it. If the proposal, design, production, modification or support of the hardware is questionable, no one bats an eye - but if the distribution has problems, then all of the sudden we need to move the discussion to scam accusation? That seems ridiculous.
I think the integrity conflict gmaxwell feels is stuck between trying to honor very specific, but incomplete, rules he created a year ago and the fact that we can discuss every nuance of HashFast's hardware in this forum, except their failure to deliver that hardware.
Shipping the first product doesn't mean a damn thing if you cannot effectively distribute and support that product once it is in the world. Most of a business is the distribution and support. That's the most critical part, there should be a place for customers to discuss it, and for companies that have a clue, for them to come and discuss it too.
This is the place to discuss it (among others) - the problem arises when you have irrational and totally inappropriate people like Christian "Xian" Antkow, Darin Bicknell, Entropy-UC, et al "participating" with misinformation, outright lies and general trolling. They contribute nothing constructive in any possible interpretation of the word and serve to just bring the forum down to near uselessness with their repeated posts of the same thing, shouting down anyone who might disagree with them and the outright lies they continue to perpetuate even in the face of indisputable contrary evidence. If you eliminate the worthless population like that, suddenly the forum becomes a much more useful place. But in the interests of "Freedom of speech," the operators of the forum are loathe to eliminate useless individuals like that, sadly... so we end up with a useless forum. |
|
|
|
|
It should be a requirement to use your real name on this forum... it would cut down on the trolling dramatically. I have absolutely zero problem with peoples real name being published if they are acting like ass hats on the internet. If you want to act like an idiot, you better be prepared to tie your horse to that wagon. Doing it anonymously is unacceptable, and I have zero sympathy for whiney little brats who want to fling poo all over the internet and not suffer the real life repercussions, such as they might be.
It's why I routinely use the real name of the super trolls like Christian "Xian" Antkow, Darrin "Bicknellski" Bicknell, etc... when people do a Google search on their names, they should be identified for exactly what they are and it should follow them forever more. Hopefully it will be a deterrent to others from acting in completely irrational, crazy manner as a matter of routine. Probably fighting against the tide with that one, but what can you do.
P.S. In before 'Hurrr durrr look at you!' ... yes, look at me. I own my posts. I don't hide behind the anonymity of the internet, for better or worse on what I post, as least I own it, which is far more than I can say for most of the super-trolls around here.
|
|
|
|
Interesting. First I've heard of this... I wonder who they served (if anyone in BFL). You know you really screwed up your "win" when the defendant first hears about a case on an unrelated 3rd party internet forum, heh.
Should be an open and shut case to get this re-opened and dismissed.
I'm guessing you should probably update your official mailing address on your business license. https://www.kansas.gov/bess/flow/main?execution=e1s5I will pass that along to those responsible for keeping that up to date. Perhaps in 2014, you can redirect some of the energy you spend defending your business practices in these 3rd party forums into resolving ACTUAL customer issues.
Fix the underlying root cause. It's an area we are working on. I have no direct control over that area, so redirecting any of my energies to that would be fruitless. Regardless, though, I only post here for entertainment purposes and when I have spare time (like sitting on a plane, holidays, etc...) and it's what I occasionally choose to do with my free time, so again, it would be fruitless, even if I did have direct control over it. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting. First I've heard of this... I wonder who they served (if anyone in BFL). You know you really screwed up your "win" when the defendant first hears about a case on an unrelated 3rd party internet forum, heh.
Should be an open and shut case to get this re-opened and dismissed.
|
|
|
|
Heh, I have one of the mods on this subforum on ignore, the guy is a disaster as a moderator IMHO. Crumbs might have stepped on a few toes but I didn't see any reason for him to be banned (not that I have read ALL his posts but what I have read would not have qualified for the ban hammer). Bring back crumbs, I miss the old chap!  Crumbs went way overboard. Make your point, defend yourself against attacks, and move on. 50 posts a day in the same thread really didn't help his case. I actually started to suspect he was there to make the naysayers look bad. I think most of the activity in Activemining threads is one person talking to his socks. I think someone needs to take a close look in the mirror, lol! |
|
|
|
And since many mods are probably "invested" in these scams, what else to expect?
Wait. I can get paid for our communities inability to keep from getting itself ripped off??? How many threads full of BFL's lies from 2012 were moved from this forum to 'OFF-TOPIC'? Moderators have taken an active and quite biased role in the development of this ridiculous business model. That's easy to answer! The answer is 0. You're the only proven liar here so far that I know of. The moderators need to moderate more and remove all the trash that clogs up this subforum... if they were "in" on anything, they'd be removing all the useless junk people like you post. Since your utter trash remains, it stands to reason the mods aren't "in" on anything... if only they were, life would be so much more pleasant without people like you around, spewing lie after lie because you are butthurt over something trivial. |
|
|
|
|
Hey... Bick has another 12 hours at least before he has to produce his product that he promised would be delivered in December! Give him the benefit of the doubt, I mean he's delivered befo... oh wait... no he hasn't. His last two projects were failures as well. Oops!
Poor guy has fail written all over him. I would hate to be him... never having accomplished a single thing in his entire life, running from one failure to another, day after day, ugh. I bet he wonders why everything he does turns to crap and doesn't realize the only common denominator between all of his failures is himself.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, go on and deflect your lying, cheating tendancies on me. You made a bet, you failed to follow through, simple as that. You lied about your proof and you lied about the bet. Pretty simple equation. You are just a liar.
|
|
|
|
Still waiting on my 1 BTC from KelticFox... what a surprise he didn't pay up.
I'll put this in simple words you'll understand as comprehension seems to be a problem for you... The statements were made. They were made by a member of Butterfly Labs staff (who was auth'd and enforced) in a public chat room. If they are true or not is not my problem. If they are true then you're a liar and you're trying to cover your arse (possible based on previous BFL statements which you made). If they are not true then you're inept at your job as Chief Operations Officer (?) because you can't control your staff. I'd seriously be questioning why he said those things. Especially in a public room, official or unofficial... The RMA issues: Very nicely worded (and clever) response! " ...but most RMAs are handled within 24 - 48 hours of arrival in our office. We have virtually no "backlog" of RMAs.". Shame there is a 33 day wait on authorisation for the RMA! As per the 1BTC I 'owe you'... I didn't see your BTC held in escrow by John.K as per your agreement. Thus I don't 'owe you' anything. ... You escrow it, I'll escrow it and then you provide the proof of your claims. If you fail to provide proof of all your quoted claims within 24 hours, you lose the bet. If you provide proof of all your claims within 24 hours, you win the bet. JohnK, if he's willing to take the escrow, is fine with me and he can keep 10% of my winnings. On the other hand there are the outstanding payments you have yet to pay for bets lost.... [1][2]I will put this in simple terms you can understand, KelticFox. We've already proven that you can't do math or understand simple English, so I will try to be as simple as possible for your poor little brain: I bet you that you could not provide proof for your statements. You have not provided proof for your statements. You lost the bet. You owe me 1 BTC. You have failed to pay the 1 BTC owed. Do you understand this? The bet was simple: You provide proof. You have not provided any proof. You lost. You are a liar for making the statements and you are a liar for not paying up the bet you lost. On the other hand, there are no outstanding payments for any bets. Again, you are lying and I challenge you to prove it. You can't, therefore you are again a liar. Would you like to also bet on that? Oh that's right, you don't follow through with your bets. |
|
|
|
|
Still waiting on my 1 BTC from KelticFox... what a surprise he didn't pay up.
|
|
|
|
|
His latest project the "Hive" and "Wasp", which he promised a prototype in December, is late... Imagine that, yet another Bicknellski device that he's unable to deliver as promised on. That makes how many devices that you've failed to deliver on, now, Bick? Why anyone believes a word you say is mind boggling.
|
|
|
|
I almost bought from you amateurs after the ArsTechnica article and I'm so glad I did my research and did not. } //end BFL hate
You and me both, my friend, you and me both! |
|
|
|
Josh is probably taking a % of HF profits due to it's suggestions to john. So there is really no point in asking him it's opinion on HF. I will always remember how sure he was that KNC was gonna be late when we meet, it must have been because he knew that KNC was legit.
And I was right... KNC was late. They promised summer delivery and didn't deliver until, what... October? No, you were wrong they suggested summer before they even finalised a product offering, generated enough interest to JV with ORSoC, held an open day and opened for sales. At the point they held an open day and most importantly opened for sales September was on the cards, and uploading a working unit well beyond the promised specs 45 mins before October began was quite the coup de grāce. I was there in person they really did get their shit together in just over 24 hours, and that's a hard act to follow. When I first contacted them I stated exactly this; "this is a burnt community, make sure you under promise and over deliver." The whole margins thing to shy on the side of what was achievable was always in the cards, they knew precisely what they were doing, as such people are happy. Perhaps this only a small community in the grand scheme of things and fresh newbie blood exists frequently enough outside the forum to sustain poor business practice, but this has always been the home of Bitcoin and a tarnished rep here will carry fourth...in essence you reap what you sow. I have no beef with you Josh but you're talking whack above, and you know it. So, you're saying KNC was lying then? Please explain this quote if I am wrong: We are Swedish miners that are producing our own ASIC miners to strengthen the market and avoid monopoly. Our company kncminer is pleased to announce the opening of a brand new web shop dedicated to the online sale of Bitcoin hardware to the international community, www.kncminer.com. We will in the upcoming weeks opening our order book to allow the purchase of our first set of ASIC miners. They are in the early stages of development now and will be ready in the summer of 2013 (yes in just a few months)Let me guess... KNC didn't really post that, right? Someone else posing as KNC did? You're the only one talking whack here, my friend, sorry. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
