 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3]
|
I think I can answer some stuff promptly, and Lab_Rat will confirm (or overrule) when he gets time.
grnbrg.
There you go again with your confidence building statements.... So you are establishing NOW that we cannot trust what you post about Lab_Rat as a hired spokesman of Lab_Rat (via disclaimer about confirming or overruling), yet we should make investment choices based upon the "facts" that you present, meanwhile the official "fact" confirmation by Lab_Rat may or may not take place on a fact-by-fact basis. In other words we cannot trust anything you say unless if each statement is confirmed by Lab_Rat, yet you are the only one making statements. grnbrg, what is your purpose again? - To act as the mainstream media to spin propaganda for whoever controls the target profit-making industry/company? -- To be able to tell truth & out-right lies mixed together with no legal accountability. -- To deceive the public into thinking that they should be listening to your opinion (though a system that allows you to lie) rather than going directly to the target profit-making industry/company to get the real answers (who will be held accountable for their responses as they have no scapegoat)? Come on. We the people have seen this game played many times before & we have had enough. That's how you read into that? Huge companies have PR/Marketing firms and they sometimes make a mistake or two which the CEO usually puts out a statement to correct. It doesn't happen much but it can. I saw nothing in his statement that would reflect that he isn't a reputable source for LabRat mining. "That's how you read into that?" - It was a logical analysis of wording. Time is of the essence for everyone so why should there be any questions of "fact" reliability or emotional jargon that doesn't need to be there? - "Lab_Rat will confirm (or overrule) when he gets time." - Shouldn't this be done before grnbrg posts "facts" about the Lab_Rat operation? The first recall of posted "facts" will splinter grnbrg's reputation as the reliability of the Lab_Rat system will come into question. - I am not leaning to either side - for or against - this security at this time as it is still in its introduction phase. Long-term it may shape up. Free markets allow businesses to launch @ any level of development, and logically the bitcoin economy allows for the minimum before launch. When interest arises, plans can change & using the power of the crowd to give the crowd what it wants is the long-term goal of the free market. "Huge companies have PR/Marketing firms" - Yes, but this is a small company with a relatively simple business model & not too many things that need to be reworded/remarketed to make the public feel better about it. If Lab_Rat just posted complicated spreadsheets & long word documents with plans, data & analysis -> then the crowd would decipher it (without any need for a PR or Marketing firm to act as an intermediary for the information). |
|
|
|
I think I can answer some stuff promptly, and Lab_Rat will confirm (or overrule) when he gets time.
grnbrg.
There you go again with your confidence building statements.... So you are establishing NOW that we cannot trust what you post about Lab_Rat as a hired spokesman of Lab_Rat (via disclaimer about confirming or overruling), yet we should make investment choices based upon the "facts" that you present, meanwhile the official "fact" confirmation by Lab_Rat may or may not take place on a fact-by-fact basis. In other words we cannot trust anything you say unless if each statement is confirmed by Lab_Rat, yet you are the only one making statements. grnbrg, what is your purpose again? - To act as the mainstream media to spin propaganda for whoever controls the target profit-making industry/company? -- To be able to tell truth & out-right lies mixed together with no legal accountability. -- To deceive the public into thinking that they should be listening to your opinion (though a system that allows you to lie) rather than going directly to the target profit-making industry/company to get the real answers (who will be held accountable for their responses as they have no scapegoat)? Come on. We the people have seen this game played many times before & we have had enough. |
|
|
|
From what I can see, he is sincere in what he is doing, and is taking pains to do it correctly and transparently. I will see if I can get some more information to post to answer some more questions.
grnbrg.
@grnbrg - you should stop making emotional statements. These are meaningless and only go to further discredit you. If he is sincere or transparent include a fact or two about it (or link to a post where you do so to avoid duplicate explanations). Telling people to trust him without providing specific facts is much the same as the methods of Piers Morgan on gun control. It will only leave you looking like a fool and with no power-base. "I will see if I can get some more information to post to answer some more questions."  - "I will see if I can get" does not exude confidence. If you want people to respect you -> you must be more finite "I will get" & you must come through as promised. No side-skirting anything. - If you are not confident of your ability to get info from labrat then how confident can we be in you (with your partial understanding) & him (with his inability to directly speak to the public)? |
|
|
|
@Lab_Rat: who are you, where are you, and what makes you believe you are qualified to carry the responsibility of your proposed venture? When things go sour, your investors will want to know where and how they can get hold of you. So please provide that information here, for transparency's sake.
Reading your posts here and on the BFL forums, you strike me as being quite young. At least mentally (no offense intended). What are your qualifications for managing such an offering, and why should anyone trust you?
There is fellow here, Hashking, a Hero member registered 18 months ago, who was well-regarded here for a long time. He carries a SCAMMER tag now, and he's just one person I'm using as an example; there are numerous cases just like this here recently, including several people trying (and eventually failing) to run mining bond/share companies (e.g. Amazingrando, for a start). These ventures fail because the people attempting to run them are inexperienced, underestimate the required scope, and make bad decisions as a result.
Now, Hashking managed a lot of BTC for a lot of people because they trusted him. Turns out he is just a high-school kid, and mis-managed the trust given to him by his investors who are now out of pocket big time. Guess what: he was inexperienced, got in over his head, lied to his investors, made some bad decisions, and things went south. Simple as that. Shouldn't have surprised anyone, if only they knew who he was.
Or how about PatrickHarnett? Arguably the most respected and trusted member here for years. Seemingly beyond reproach. He didn't run a mining operation, but he did manage thousands of BTC for people. Just like you are attempting to do. Now Patrick is carrying a SCAMMER tag. And I'm not even going to mention what happened with Pirateat40.
There are endless examples of people who may or may not have had good intentions from the start, that inevitably ended up saving their own skins at the expense of their investors. That seems to be par for the course in this 'anonymous bitcoin club' we find ourselves in. But I think a growing portion of us has seen, experienced, and been affected by enough scams that we refuse to accept the call of some random nameless, faceless, internet persona screaming "give me your money!" for whatever the promise-of-the-day happens to be.
So who are you? Convince us that you are different. Or tell us you are not.
bravo bravo! |
|
|
|
how old are you?
haha. I was wondering this myself. |
|
|
|
|
rUNqft26qUVYWx7aJoKKX2kLVW5ud9EXtB
|
|
|
|
guys we should say goodbye to our coins,this site is gone Quit trying to create panic. Panic creates unneeded backlash. Backlash increases the odds that someone may throw in the towel regardless of whether or not they can actually recover. BTC-e has no reason to screw the public as they have the potential to make way more money long-term by staying legit. It may even be profitable enough that they could refund hacked funds (no reports of this during recent downtime), so don't worry/. Looking forward to the resolution of this. |
|
|
|
|
I support the use of the chips before they are shipped as it does ensure the integrity of them. Seeing how it is a new company, they do need time to test & they do not have enough development time to give us this valuable service immediately without worries of failure, so this may be the only way to ensure that there is not widespread failure upon arrival/ install.
They may have been used for too long to be seen as a respectable gesture, but we must acknowledge that their widespread testing & the funds from such are likely leading to new more efficient chips that will provide an increasing amount of value to the community in the long-term. More value than they are currently taking (as long as they ship on time & continually upgrade as planned).
|
|
|
|
There are no rules in this forum.
pretty much. there are very little rules that i'm aware of. Organic free trade... though not necessarily fair trade, The market will need to organically develop its own policies & people will vote with their bitcoins as to which community guidelines are the best. For right now there are relatively no rules being enforced by the top bitcoin websites as their is no widespread call for such. |
|
|
|
|
A lottery-driven giveaway for sharing personal info.
I would be much more likely to take my time filling this out if they planned on releasing a public report with the results.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking forward to purchasing these as physical scratch off tickets. They would make a great present.
|
|
|
|
|
