Oh good, so now the dev team's salary is being paid by these companies and "donations".
That's essentially a direct copy of what Linux Foundation is doing. They're paying Torvalds to maintain the kernel. Hopefully it works out. If it were just that, I wouldn't be worried too much. They could have been donating to them all this time and it's just now more transparent. Hopefully they don't gain any more real powers and things just stay optional. If the licenses are unreasonable people may just not use or expect them. |
|
|
|
He's got legitimate concerns, and it's not over nothing. We can help solve or mitigate these problems as a community. My hope is that the Bitcoin Foundation will be the organization that focuses and unlocks all of your energy and talents towards promoting Bitcoins, protecting them, and increasing their legitimacy through standardization.
There’s a huge amount of support for the Foundation from many of the people who matter to Bitcoin’s future: Charlie Shrem, Mark Karpeles, Gavin Andresen and Jon Matonis are all starting out on the Board of Directors. Roger Ver has announced a significant donation to the Foundation as a way to get our budget launched, Mark Karpeles at Mt. Gox has signed up for the first Platinum membership, and I expect others will follow shortly. BitInstant and CoinLab have also signed up as Corporate Members. This sort of support before launch is super encouraging; I look forward to seeing more participation as we launch and get the word out.
Talk of standardization, and MtGox and BitInstant mentioned in the very next paragraph as the Board of Directors. MtGox's history of seizing tainted coins, and requiring id after allowing users to deposit make me feel really uncomfortable with the whole standards thing. Oh, and this next part is spiffy. So, what will we be doing in 2013 with the Bitcoin Foundation? We’ve set our eyes on accomplishing the following things:
Begin to pay Gavin’s salary and get him some budget for the core development team
Run a payments-oriented Silicon Valley Bitcoin Conference in the spring (Bitcoin 2013)
Publish a set of best practices for businesses transacting in Bitcoin, covering topics from accounting to physical and digital security
Create an opt-in certification process for Bitcoin businesses
Oh good, so now the dev team's salary is being paid by these companies and "donations". Hopefully the standards don't find their way into the next bitcoin client. I probably won't be joining. Answer this for me: Before an unelected team of developers directed the project, and now you have the opportunity to actually influence the decisions and composition of the development team. Can you honestly say you have lost influence? Couldn't you simply recognize this as a more efficient structure for the dev team?
Somebody gained influence. It wasn't me, wasn't him, most likely wasn't you either. |
|
|
|
I assume Goat should have copies of his contracts, oh wait, one of them was "Test", looks like I had that one backed up in my brain  If he did things right, they should have been gpg signed, so even if he brings out the copies people can still check to see they are correct. Now Goat, here are a few simple steps to clear up this mess completely: 1 - Give Nefario a btc address and get your customers money from him. 2 - Go to cryptostocks, open up assets corresponding to the assets you had on GLBSE. 3 - Send out communication to assetholders, put up a big notice on this forum, if you have a website then put a notice there, etc, etc. 4 - Have asset holders provide you with the claim code and a cryptostocks account, transfer them the shares. 5 - Stop whining. Sure sounds reasonable let's see if we can do this... Now what do I do if someone uses the code more than once? Since Nefario gave out the codes he will 100% back them correct? Or what if they don't want a cryptostocks account? Or I can't reach them? I can see how it's a frustrating situation, what information were you given? I thought you were given contact emails and usernames too, can these not be used to verify claim codes as well? If more than one person is using the same email address, username, and claim codes then those should be withheld until it can be cleared up, but that's no reason to hold up the rest of them. To address another concern, if someone uses an email address, claim code, and username to verify with you, and later someone else uses the same information, then they lost control of their account somehow which makes it their problem. |
|
|
|
Usagi is the one at the head of the group.
Most of the members of the group are pretty solid.
Usagi is the one at the head of the group. Most of the members of the group are pretty solid. Sense. Please make some. All the members -1 (Usagi) = most. |
|
|
|
It's very probable that it was Matthew N. Wright (from IP logs).
So you're saying that the guy went from 10k BTC bet extravaganza, to 5 BTC scams? Warm mouth affair surely comes next. Seriously though, while I don't know him at all, I have an impression that such blatant scam doesn't quite fit his character. What's he got to lose at this point? He lost his job, been ostracized from the community, lost many of his friends, lost his rep, Vlad is going after him, etc. Besides, he could have gotten much more than 5 btc via pms if he hadn't been outed. I get the feeling Matthew is going to be Bitscalper 2.0. As for his character...con men are often the most likable people you'll ever meet. That's how they do their work. I don't know all the details from the other incident, but I do know he was late on paying, then escalated by reneging on the agreement and refused to pay for services rendered. |
|
|
|
|
What's wrong with old threads? There's a lot of posts/threads, and there's a lot of interesting older discussions that will never get read by people who would be interested in it.
|
|
|
|
If we're the only intelligent life in the universe, there's an awful lot of wasted space.
You just made Jodie Foster fall in love with you. Oh man I forgot all about that movie. I'll have to watch it this weekend, I imagine the scene where she's entering the contraption will be awesome in hi def and with a good sound system. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the heads up, he's banned.
Also, I originally wasn't going to say anything about the user's other account, but since the other account is scammer tagged and there is no legitimate reason I can think of to spoof an account in that way, I feel a duty to do so. It's very probable that it was Matthew N. Wright (from IP logs).
|
|
|
|
None. Because:
1. Somebody giving out btc for free may choose whether or not he wants to keep on doing it.
2. Obvious risk and fraud potential, no guarantees, nothing. Why would you even send him money? (He apparently paid back when he ran out, so he possibly fulfilled the ROI promise for the rest)
3. If money returned, not a scammer.
4. Obvious asshole. But not a scammer.
Listen folks, there's a HUGE DIFFERENCE between a real scam which deliberately tricks people into a loss of money by providing fake documentation, orchestrated acting and/or a complex system of psychological and legal tricks and a bunch of kids on an internet forum saying "Give me your money and I'll give it back, promise!"
Pirate's scam was a scam, and a fucking good one at that.
The above are casual exploitations of naive stupidity.
There's a fucking difference alright?!
And you know what's the best part? Ironically, pirateat40 doesn't even have the scammer tag.
Yes he does have a scammer tag. And people being dumb or careless with their money doesn't make it right to steal or lie. There's no excuse that justifies that. And if you think there is then you're morally bankrupt and should stay away from society in general. |
|
|
|
Sorry, but it's just not true. Sure people see UFO's all the time (unidentified flying object). But not one single time in all of history did it turn out to be a spaceship from another planet. Not one single time in all of science has a living thing been found anyplace but Earth.
As a scientist myself I don't discount the possibility that a ship could land tomorrow. It may even be likely that life exists elsewhere. But I also operate on evidence. There has never been any evidence of such a thing. Evidence is not a blurry photo or a crackpot website.
If we're the only intelligent life in the universe, there's an awful lot of wasted space. I don't necessarily think they've been here, but it almost definitely exists somewhere. |
|
|
|
Damn where did this thread go? Can we get back on track with the guy trying to pawn off poisonous barnwood to remodel a 6000 square foot industrial indoor smoking lounge whose air is cleaned by a single $179 Costco portable air conditioner while off-the-book undocumented workers are rushing from folding table to folding table carrying salad tongs full of burning charcoal while trying to avoid stepping on the thousands of imported Iranian pistachio shells that litter a floor below a raised platform from whence Dank holds dominion on a giant chess set?
Don't be ridiculous. He's not going to buy salad tongs, he'll just think the pain away. |
|
|
|
@BadBear I will talk to Maged.
But as you have seen Theymos said Nefario made that deal and Nefario said he made that deal.
It seems pretty pointless if Nefario can get away with it by just deleting some forum posts or what not... In the future we will ahve to back up the whole site every time someone who we trust makes and verbal contract...
But anyway it has gone way beyond at this point. He has stolen my assets.
I'm interested to see if you really will give Nefario the scammers tag or not, he has more than made it clear that he made an agreement with me and broke it and then stole from me.
Destroying my GLBSE account with my assets in it is theft.
I can't help you if you don't help me. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry but this is ridiculous and I'm against it. I'm not going to censor someone or scammer tag them just for expressing their right to free speech, no matter what games you play on IRC.
|
|
|
|
Badbear, what I meant was min 10 BTC per person, so if only 7 people bet 10 btc each, thats only 70 btc on the table. I am looking for 1000 BTC min.
Also, if you smell bull shit, the odds are 3 to 1 right now. Place your bet.
Yeah, odds are even higher you'll just disappear and your next "wife" will make an account. |
|
|
|
First of all, the dude with the timer, who the fuck said that I had 24 hrs to prove it? Go suck a big dick.
Second, I have never signed anything using bitcoin, and that sounds like a neat feature. Can somebody explain how this is done?
And third, I will not prove anything until I see at least 1000 BTC on the table, so somebody work the spreadsheet.
Last, If I am lying, not only will I pay, but I will take the scammer tag and a BAN and follow Matthew straight to hell.
Money Where Your Mouth Is.
Maria.
People call you out on it, first it's 10 btc, now it's 1k, what next? Once somebody does that, then it'll be 10k?  |
|
|
|
|
I'm not going to do anything based on your word, I want to see exactly what was said. The original agreement is very important when determining if the agreement was broken, I don't see how that is difficult to understand or why I have to explain it.
|
|
|
|
|
Not that, the original quotes from the time it happened.
|
|
|
|
An offer does not constitute a contract, and would require shareholder approval before it could go through. Nothing violated.
I'm afraid that's not true because in this case, there is detrimental reliance sufficient to create promissory estoppel. "A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee or a third person and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise. The remedy granted for breach may be limited as justice requires." -- Second Restatement of Contracts http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Promissory+Estoppel"Certain elements must be established to invoke promissory estoppel. A promisor—one who makes a promise—makes a gratuitous promise that he should reasonably have expected to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee—one to whom a promise has been made. The promisee justifiably relies on the promise. A substantial detriment—that is, an economic loss—ensues to the promisee from action or forbearance. Injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise. A majority of courts apply the doctrine to any situation in which all of these elements are present." It appears in this case, a promise was made. The promise was relied upon to the detriment of those who relied on it. This reliance was foreseeable and should have been reasonably expected to increase the value of the outstanding shares. However, what the consequences of this should be is a closer question. Enforcing the promise would mean that the promisor would be liable for damages for breach of the promise. This is why if nothing else I feel tricked, used and stolen from. He thinks that by delisting all of my assets and destroying my GLBSE account he can just take my assets and BTC. That is just scammer... Signed contract or it didn't happen. Maged and I have both asked him for links/quotes, but he won't for some reason. I wonder what that reason is. Quoting my post since Goat seems to have missed it. What were the exact words he said when he made the listing "legitimate"?
I would have to look it up but there are many people who know Nefario said he would make them "legitimate". Nefario even admitted it in this thread. Humor us and post quotes/links. |
|
|
|
What were the exact words he said when he made the listing "legitimate"?
I would have to look it up but there are many people who know Nefario said he would make them "legitimate". Nefario even admitted it in this thread. Humor us and post quotes/links. |
|
|
|
Scenario 2 is not a scam. Someone said he would double the money you send him and instead he just send back your money. How the hell is this a scam?
What if someone asked you for a loan, promised to pay interest, then once they repay the loan they only repay the principal and say "Sorry I don't have the interest"? You seem to be stuck in a thought loop of promised returns=greed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
