You'll be just fine then - Donald, Patrick and Amir are still scammer tag-free despite their victims not being made whole.

You can disagree with Rothbard or existing laws as much as you like, but the real world exists and you're bound by its laws.  Even if mere "shareholders" in your Franken-company had no liability for the entity's actions (and if they voted in favour of the company pursuing illegal activity they would likely lose any protection from liability), office-holders have specific and well-defined liability in respect of the organisations in which they accept those roles, as do people who participate in management activity whether or not they are formally designated as office-holders.

You obviously realise all this because you didn't want your name legally connected with a "legitimate" GLBSE.  You were mistaken, however, in assuming that just because GLBSE is a "pretend" company, it's partners don't have any personal liability for its actions.  This is a mistake I've seen many times in the Bitcoin community.  Instead of getting proper legal advice before launching Bitcoin enterprises, people just go ahead and operate them according to how they wished the law to be.

Whether or not you think you should be responsible for the actions of GLBSE in no way changes of whether you're actually responsible for them at law.  You don't get to cry "that's not fair" just because you exposed yourself to that liability either willingly or out of ignorance.  "But why" is what little children ask when they don't like an answer.  "How am I going to deal with this" is the adult question you should be trying to answer.

"The company" is a myth.  No company exists.  At best, you have a generic partnership and that means that the partners are personally jointly and severally liable for the actions of the company.  "Jointly and severally" means that every single one of you can be held 100% liable - your liability isn't even limited to the percentage of your ownership interest.  Even if you'd had a limited partnership, the limited partners (whose role is effectively that of shareholders) would only be protected from liability if they confined themselves to specific "safe harbour" activities in respect of the partnership.

The Bitcoin drama calendar is getting somewhat crowded, with people currently waiting for Nefario to get his shit together and to see whether there's any communication from pirate tomorrow.  Those things should take us right up to the time when BFL is due to ship the first ASICs.

Kudos.   Are any of the other partners willing to offer the same?

dank's fast becoming the Chris-Chan of Bitcoin.  He'll probably be "famous" by the end of the year, but only because it can't be all that much longer before 4chan becomes aware of his existence.

He wants to give his fellow Bitcoiners the opportunity to get in on his idea before seeking conventional funding.  At least that was the excuse dank used for not getting a bank loan for his hookah lounge. 

He's probably off getting high because people are being mean and it's all too stressful to deal with.  Any half-way competent person would have had a working claims page up within hours. It's astonishing how the systems for taking people's funds rarely break down but the systems for returning them have so many problems.

What a crock of shit.  We can't deduce anything from the fact that he's asking for KYC information other than the fact that his lawyer may have advised him that it's a good idea.  

That he's not asking for it in a legal manner suggests that there isn't any government authority asking him to collect it.  He hasn't mentioned the specific legislation under which the information is being requested, how the information will be used, how the information will be protected, or how long the information will be kept.  If he's acquiring the information for a lawfully required purpose - eg KYC/AML/CTF regulation compliance - then he must disclose those things.

What seems to have happened is that he's made enquiries about what would be required of a legitimate exchange and is now trying to apply those procedures post hoc to an enterprise he fully knew was not legitimate because he believes that doing so will somehow protect him if GLBSE's activities ever come under any kind of regulatory scrutiny.  Ironically, the manner in which this has been handled makes it likely that users themselves will end up contacting the FSA, thus bringing GLBSE under the very scrutiny Nefario was hoping to avoid.

Why are you asking for donations in "Long Term Offers"?  Dank Bank may offer interest and pay back lenders but your musical festival is not a Dank Bank project - as you just said, you're asking for donations which won't be paid back.

Your Dank Bank thread should only be about your "legitimate" Dank Bank business.  Instead, you now solicit donations for your music festival in the OP of your Dank Bank thread when the music festival is clearly not being offered as an investment on which people will be given a return, whether as a fixed loan or as a share of the *cough* profits.  The Long Term Offers forum is for lending and borrowing and soliciting donations for your music festival is neither.

Yay, gang tags!

On a more serious note, dank's thread doesn't belong in Long Term Offers.  He's asking for donations and not offering people who give him funds for the Gathering of the Dankalos any return other than "good karma".  The only other "business" he uses that thread for is taking out the occasional pay-day style loan, which belongs in general Lending not Long-term offers. 

If it wasn't for dank's critics, there'd be nobody posting in dank's threads except for dank and he'd have to find another way to attention whore and keep it on the front page.  He pretty much uses this thread as a LiveJournal anyway and it probably should have been moved to off-topic long ago.

Nobody's counting down the days left until the end of the year more than us.  I can't wait to see what bullshit excuse dank pulls out for not putting on a concert bigger than Woodstock as December 31 draws closer.

dank's thread definitely doesn't belong in Long Term Offers.  At best, he's taking out personal loans so it belongs in the general Lending forum.

Bubble universe theory.

While you're at it, can you ask him why he doesn't have the balls to deal directly with the community himself? 

Actually, this depends on the foundation document.  Quorum requirements often state that a certain number of shareholders or shareholders representing a certain percentage of the enterprise must be present for the meeting to even be valid.  Likewise, whether the passing of a motion requires the majority of people present at the meeting or the majority of all interests is usually also spelled out.  Most ventures with a small number of voters don't leave themselves open to the possibility of a few people with a minority interest being able to pass a motion which binds the majority - which is possible under your scenario.

There are all sorts of procedural issues which are also usually stated in the foundation documents, such as notice of special resolutions (and a meeting to shut down the company would fall under this) and the numbers needed to pass a special resolution (generally higher than what is needed to pass an ordinary motion).

While this is true, it should probably be pointed out that dank is soliciting and accepting donations on the basis that he is going to become one of the "greatest musicians" and stage a musical festival bigger than Woodstock by the end of the year.  His ability to play guitar is somewhat relevant to whether or not he can achieve "greatest musician" status in the next three months and if he is not actively organising the world's biggest music festival then saying that he is going to do so is certainly scamming people.

There goes my toxx clause.  I obviously didn't set the bar low enough.

That is not a genuine Bitcoin enthusiast.  Not nearly enough fire hazards.

And yeah, something which sounds like an Amway pitch probably isn't the best pick up line.

Why do I have visions of Amir and Nefario sitting around trying to fix this while high?

Do personal cheques in the US not have the name of the account-holder printed on them?

Nefario did this.  Shareholders' meetings, company secretary, treasurer, accountant who isn't really an accountant, by-laws - all kinds of things which might lead the uninformed to conclude that BitcoinGlobal and GLBSE were actual companies with boards of directors, company registration, etc.

And of course then there's the "asset-issuers" (some of whom are based in the US) who most definitely referred to IPOs, bonds, shares, business models, shareholders, dividends, etc.