is there not the icaan or some asscoiation responsible for ALL web domain re-sellers ?
if the chinese registrar allows them to operate after being reported they should be fined or suspended from
being able to sell domains
We reported, but ICANN gives 45 days for the registrar to take action. Chances are that by then the website will not be up anyway. |
|
|
|
|
That could be interesting. I hope their system supports unicode.
|
|
|
|
Im going to try for an insanely long vanity addy..
Something like 1Sitonmyface34dasfASDFa34
You should try something like 1PZjfkLZBT7Q3UFmyEWH8QtuzTMi3MUiBj. If you succeed you have a big reward.  Closest I got here are 1PzjfKTq4zf4eWRvirYJBucrWU6uaZwh9m and 1PZJfKwXxdPjVKEhMx4UThiMtL5GSrCtH |
|
|
|
+1 yep have to agree, 5.5% is a bit high for most of us, especially when mtgox charges 0.6% for exchages and 1% to withdraw into okpay
Except our OkPay queue is currently a bit lagged (this will be fixed eventually, for now we are focusing on getting Dwolla back while handling Bitcoinica while handling legal issues and so many other things). |
|
|
|
@Rarity
I think that you are just climbing, and there is an high probability that no one will ever want your support against an accusation of scam.
I don't particularly care what other folks think about me. If I see an innocent man like Zhou Tong being treated the way this forum is treating him, I will stand up for them. One day folks around here will know how to know the truth like I have learned. For the sake of everyone falsely accused, I hope that time is soon and you will all find the Clarity I have found. The way the forum reacted was kind of predictable, but it's not something AurumXchange can do much about, as the matter had already been brought publicly here. Another example of disproportional public response is TheOatmeal vs. FunnyJunk (and their lawyer). We all have a duty to report things publicly in some cases, but the following public response can be disproportioned as people often jump to conclusions. |
|
|
|
Both of which they had no right to reveal in violation of their privacy policy. The point is, however, that by the false legal interpretation they are suggesting they COULD HAVE released everything about the account if they wanted to. This is how you know their interpretation does not make any sense.
Both of which were already public information at that point, Zhou Tong having published himself that he had a $40k LR transaction blocked with AurumXchange on this very forum, and the fact that the email is linked to Zhou is something that didn't come from AurumXchange's protected files, but from different bitcoiners stepping up during the investigation saying they recognize this email. |
|
|
|
when adding a withdraw method (wire) it asks for MY name and address, but doesn't ask for the beneficiary account name (company).
i hope mtgox has thought about the fact that these are sometimes different.
Actually we can only send funds to the user of the MtGox account. If the MtGox account is opened for a company, then "Your name" is, from a company's point of view, the company's name. Without this kind of wording, some people think that they can actually send funds to whoever they want (which would be no longer a "withdraw" but a "transfer"). |
|
|
|
Sure, that is the main reason why you (and others) try to prevent ZT to return the funds. Very logically  If Zhou was not the theif, then the funds are not his to return. He is not legally entitled to handle or transfer stolen goods and nor it seems is Murck. Don't try to bait me on logic. It's clear that you cannot understand the logic that for something to be legally legitimate it must have legal authority. Logic and law do not mix well, but most of the time laws do make sense. For example you do not need legal authority to be acting legally, you just need to act within the scope of the law. For Patrick Murck, officially representing the owners of Bitcoinica LP, receiving goods that were stolen from Bitcoinica LP sounds actually fine, and is probably the best thing that could happen at that point. The fact is returning funds to customers is not going to be made easy at all by the fact that part of the funds is missing, and the fact that active account data was apparently deleted by the hacker. The claim process is made so people can fill claims, but those claims then need to be reviewed, and processed. The process also usually includes selling any company property to attempt to reduce the missing part... this will take some time. |
|
|
|
Thankfully, Mr. Murck stepped in as a licensed attorney to broker their receipt. He was subjected to a lot of hazing and invasion of privacy here for doing so. For the 5th time: Under what legal authority is Murck able to receive and transfer stolen goods?. As far as I can see, Patrick Murck is acting in contact with Tihan Seale, who is the only known individual known to represent the owners of Bitcoinica LP. That gives him enough authority to recover whatever possessions that used to be in Bitcoinica's care when whoever stole these says he wants to return [part of] it. |
|
|
|
zhoutong may be thief or not, but those (AurumExchange) who fingered/accused zhoutong as thief, so far NOT done/doing anything legally & just watching how forum members get angry, shouting, scolding zhoutong.
The main issue is that this had been brought publicly on this very forum before by Zhou Tong himself, complaining his funds were stuck with AurumXchange. In that kind of case, the only thing a company can do is to release a statement explaining what happened. |
|
|
|
When you deposit funds on MtGox, those funds are then used for other accounts, it's the way most (if not all) online wallets are working.
Used for what? I thought this funds were in a single account, as you admitted. Basically, the blockchain is not a reliable way to track bitcoins deposited on online wallets. |
|
|
|
When you deposit funds on MtGox, those funds are then used for other accounts, it's the way most (if not all) online wallets are working. |
|
|
|
Actually those funds were deposited on MtGox by Patrick Murck, cf: MtGox officially confirms currently having on deposit those 15,006.00000000 BTC. As you may know, our system uses a pooled Bitcoin online reserve, which means that activity beyond that point is no longer from Bitcoinica, LP. We also have disabled the ability to withdraw Bitcoins from the account where those Bitcoins are held to ensure the security of those coins until we receive validated information from an appointed receiver for Bitcoinica, LP. |
|
|
|
Creditors are the people who are owed money. Insolvency law divides creditors into various groups and assigns those groups a priority for repayment. Sometimes unsecured creditors receive only a few cents on the dollar from liquidation or even nothing at all. Based on the information we have at the moment (and we don't have any information about other creditors who may have claims), it's likely that Bitcoinica users will receive some distribution - it's not possible to predict the % they'll receive because that is determined towards the end of the liquidation process.
Bitcoinica has hopefully little to none other liabilities, which would limit the process to returning funds to bitcoinica users. |
|
|
|
It is ridiculous to assert that Zhou will "spend years in prison". Even if sufficient evidence was found to warrant criminal charges being pursued, it's utterly unclear right now which country would have jurisdiction and what specific charges would be applicable - and those things greatly influence the type of sentence which would be imposed if prosecution resulted in conviction.
Countries with jurisdiction over this matter includes New Zealand, USA, and any country whose citizens or resident is missing funds that were deposited on Bitcoinica. |
|
|
|
We have been anxiously waiting for weeks!  Sometimes I wish we could just wire to Dwolla... |
|
|
|
Oops, yes, I do concur. I woke to Mark's report on Zhou Tong's account being hacked, and with a cursory glance on his recent posts reaffirmed that to me. Guess I need to snap out of those afternoon naps - was my sarcastic detector failing.  Actually, this was quite over the sarcastic level acceptable considering the current situation. |
|
|
|
Yes, they are all me. I'm Tom Williams's son actually. Dick Williams and Harry Williams are his two brothers.
 And how did you get in there? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
