Absolutely not.

There are obvious genuine reasons for not wanting to verify ...

Projects/businesses seeking funding for activities which are legally untested (or outright illegal) in the country of operation - remember Bitcoin itself falls into that category in many - e.g. now almost certainly Ethopia - http://allafrica.com/stories/201206180068.html.

One of the main reasons I am involved with Bitcoin is to ensure that the capital of everyone (not just the banksters, oligarchs, dictators ...) is able to flow freely - I would almost certainly withdraw my support of GLBSE should any such move be made.

I fully understand why GLBSE provides the optional service of verification for asset owners and actively encourage it - it is an essential means of maximising investor confidence and should be viewed by asset owners are a superb differentiator, however, it should never be made mandatory.

Time for asset owners to justify there lack of transparency. I've got plenty more to invest when asset owners act to nullify some further risk for me.

Interesting. I'm liking all the new opportunities coming up on GLBSE. Will be following your progress and hopefully investing.

Verification isn't about guarding against impersonation, it is about having sufficient details to collectively take legal action should this turn out to be a scam. Unless the activities the fund will be investing in are going to be "grey" from a legal perspective (e.g. I fully understand why the owner of the BitcoinTorrentz asset remains unverified), I see no reason to protect your privacy.

Without that full verification, you will get little interest from those with significant funds to invest and the fund will be all the worse for it.

Maybe a better way of approaching this is to ask why you feel the need to remain anonymous ?

I'll require full verification be completed before I'll contemplate investing.

Besides that, please share your business background. What history/experience do you have as a venture capitalist ? What's the biggest success and biggest failure to date ? What do you consider sets you apart ? What makes this fund different from the many other venture capital style funds available and GLBSE platform in general ? Why would I want to place a further level of risk between me and the ventures ?

Your question makes no sense. I suggest you rewrite it.

Agreed the sentence can be interpreted either way - over to mjcmurfy to clarify whether we are being asked to consider an INCREASE in dividend frequency to once every two weeks or a DECREASE in frequency to once every two months.

Price wise I would be comparing to this service - https://www.giganews.com/signup
Then add a premium for the true anonymity provided from BTC payment for the service.

Looks to me that the current 0.05 BTC/GB price is about right - attractively low to encourage a building of the user base and repeated custom.

mjcmurgy ...

   What is happening with the server hosting ?
   When does the existing contract end ?
   Is that still being provided by you at no cost to the BitCoinTorrentz.com company ?
   How much longer will that continue ?
   How much further can the userbase / usage expand before it will have to obtain it's own server hosting (presumably at the same location) ?
   Should we consider obtaining it's own server to improve uptime / reliability ?
   Do you feel that is impacting userbase growth / usage at all ?
   Do you think it would be beneficial to increase advertising spending ?
   What maximum monthly increase in userbase / usage could the service (you, the server and the software) cope with ?
   How do you think we should go about achieving that ? (Is part of the driver of your question on whether the price should be dropped motivated by that ?)

   Essentially I'm asking if the price were to drop by an "extreme" amount (P%) and we get an increase in usage of >P% (so that overall profit is greater) - what breaks first ?
      The monthly (?) data limit for the server, the bandwidth limit for simultaneous torrent download, the bandwidth limit for simultaneous HTTP completed file download,
      the software, your ability to deal with customer support issues (questions, complaints etc ...), the toleration of other users / services also using the server ?

   The last thing I would want at this time is to drop the price and see an unsustainable increase in usage resulting in the free server resource being withdrawn.

   I'm trying to think ahead to the company operation a year, 3 years and (ever optimistically) 10 years from now :O)

What are your projections of how usage will change with such a price change ?

How did usage change with previous price changes / deals ?

Are the Usage Statistics for this month available ?

What are your longer terms plans for the company ? Expansion, new services, new features etc ... ?

My gut feeling on the price is that unless competition for the service appears, the price should not be dropped.
The completely anonymous download service this company provides is still unique as far as I am aware.

Regarding the dividend schedule, given the company is still relatively young, I would be expecting to see dividends (and perhaps more importantly Usage Statistics) continue on the monthly frequency, so investors can keep a close eye on how their investment (and the company and you) is/are performing.

A move to dividends every 2 months would, at this stage of the company, unfortunately, be a driver for me to de-invest, possibly completely.

That comment was only in regard to the jokey comment ...


I would expect significant assistance from GLBSE should any verified asset owner behave in a similar fraudulent manner as Tawsix did.

Personally, I wouldn't risk much at all in any unverified asset owner unless there was an extremely good justification for why they are unverified - for example the pot growing asset being discussed.

While my own financial loss from investing in SIN was minimal, I am extremely annoyed by the damage it did to investor confidence in Bitcoin, GLBSE etc ...

Tawsix has to be punished for that and actively prevented from repeating his behaviour.

The optional verification process should prove to be an excellent guard against such - hopefully we won't need an acid test.

I am curious which specific assets Sukrim was referring to, though my appetite for mining related investment is minimal to non existent at this time.

Subbed. More stock exchange competition. Excellent.

I'm sure I remember seeing a young man doing a piece to camera inside an SUV style car. It was parked in some car park so as to protect his location. Still be useful to get a copy as evidence and for further investigation.

If they are verified then I would expect considerable assistance from GLBSE. We are paying for a fully released service now after all and upholding the integrity of the exchange is paramount to continued success/existence.

Did anyone take a copy of the video he made?

Some grabs from that and Tineye with suitable filters ...

Revenge is going to be so sweet. Pissing off so many people at such a young age was not a smart move.

Would love to invest in this (sick of mining funds - no imagination) but the 20 BTC fee to join the exchange is prohibitively expensive.

With Bitcoin where it is today, I can't afford risk investing anything more than an additional $1000 in total.

No way am I paying 10% of that to the exchange.

Too greedy.

Made even worse by the fact that the only investment available on the exchange that I would currently want to invest in is S.BVPS.

Catch 22 - too few investments - too few investors - too high fees - too small market.

Subbed. I like the proposal and will keenly follow it's development. Certainly more interesting than yet another GLBSE mining fund :O)

I've reposted my sell order at 0.21 BTC / share.

When can we expect further purchases to refund investors ?

Subbed. Should prove very useful. Thanks for sharing.

Excellent news. Will you be releasing the code under an open source licence ? I would require this in order to run any node of such an exchange - same as the Bitcoin client itself.

Will you operate in competition with GLBSE or through it ?

Potato / Potatoe, Tomato / Tomatoe :O) ... I get what you mean though ... all incorporated into the current risk assessment ;O)

I'd quite like to invest a bit in the BIOETHANOL asset too, but there is a similar lack of verification and information in general.

Meh ... BTCs waiting guys/gals ...