|
Just to clarify my stance.
What I see is someone who did a project with no illegitimate intentions that grew to a point that made him the vessel of a illegal operation despite his intentions. He decided to pull off to not be part of an illegal scheme. That is a good moral decision in general. It is indeed sad to see it affect others, but he is currently condonned despite him.
It's pretty much like being mad at your drug dealer because he decided to get his life straight and won't be able to supply you anymore. Expect, the drug dealer actually knew what he was getting into.
Sure, some damage is done, and we still don't know to which extent. But anyone condonning a move that someone did to get them self out of a illegal position is just greedy and de facto has a much lower moral compass than him.
|
|
|
|
He felt the need to close
Except, as it was organized, it wasn't his to close. If he did the right thing he would have gone to jail and took responsibility for his actions that he alone was responsible for and whould have gotten his legal advance on his own dime before taking anyone's money. But no, he decided to make the "company" legit, not something any of the other owners agreed to, decided to take the company's money to pay for his own personal legal advice and decided to save his own ass at the expense of all the shareholders' stake and their privacy and at the expensive all his users' privacy. A scammer is to mild of tag for scum like that. So... nice rational... its not his choice to close, but it would be him to take the full responsibility? Make someone 100% liable but with 10% of the voice? "No one agreed to make the company legit"... where are you taking this from? Bit coin.me said in another thread he was happy and would have like to see it being legit. Basically you are saying... everyone were happy to have an enabling platform, shareholders were consciously owners of an illegal company, but nefario is the only one who should be liable. If you ever plan to go into business with someone, let them know upfront you want all the benefits with no liability, that might change their idea of going in partnership with you. Basically you have to choose, it was his choice to close or everyone is equally liable, you simply cannot have it both ways. Everyone was and is equally liable, that's what a shared ownership means. But some shareholders were smart enough to remain pseudononymous and didn't care for this liability and were perfectly willing to continue to run this company in another "jurisdiction" "illegally" as it were risking getting "persecuted" by the state mafia. Nefario had the option to step down, take responsibility for his "crime" and let others do what they may, but he decided to save his own ass without any regard for the wishes of the other owners. And when I say "No one agreed to make the company legit" I of course mean there was no such motion passed by the shareholders. That a few of them might have been for it, or even the majority is completely irrelevant in such an organization. Saving his own ass also saves the others asses. Options that you stated, leave and be accountable, stay and be accountable or close and save his (and others asses)... and apparently that's the wrong choice. I must be a very bad person too to be tempted towards the legally moral choice too... Granted I would have tried to make a smoother closing, but besides the delay (which only really starts now to be an actual delay, the next day was not a delay...), most things indicates he is at least trying not ninja quit. (Why would he refund only some btc, less personal gain, same liability ; no personal gain from not releasing asset info except lots of work, plus he actually put a system in place to collect info, so no point in setting it up with no intention to finish). |
|
|
|
He felt the need to close
Except, as it was organized, it wasn't his to close. If he did the right thing he would have gone to jail and took responsibility for his actions that he alone was responsible for and whould have gotten his legal advance on his own dime before taking anyone's money. But no, he decided to make the "company" legit, not something any of the other owners agreed to, decided to take the company's money to pay for his own personal legal advice and decided to save his own ass at the expense of all the shareholders' stake and their privacy and at the expensive all his users' privacy. A scammer is to mild of tag for scum like that. So... nice rational... its not his choice to close, but it would be him to take the full responsibility? Make someone 100% liable but with 10% of the voice? "No one agreed to make the company legit"... where are you taking this from? Bit coin.me said in another thread he was happy and would have like to see it being legit. Basically you are saying... everyone were happy to have an enabling platform, shareholders were consciously owners of an illegal company, but nefario is the only one who should be liable. If you ever plan to go into business with someone, let them know upfront you want all the benefits with no liability, that might change their idea of going in partnership with you. Basically you have to choose, it was his choice to close or everyone is equally liable, you simply cannot have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Just so we can be clear here... are you suggesting that the average person in this community would sit on tens of thousands of dollars of other people's money, lied to their partners and then taken action without their approval that destroyed the value of their investment after taking a salary from them (without withholding taxes, so it's probably more like selling them consulting services) and then conduct a bizarre and totally random return, partial return, double return process on a very limited amount of the money, and never communicate clearly?
'Cause if that's what you are saying, I disagree. I don't think the majority of the people involved with bitcoins are that kind of scumbag. Call me naive, but I would like to hope that there is a better class here.
So as I see it, most of your issues with him are before the closing of GLBSE? And also mostly speculative. What I see here is poor management supported by many, and those many are now frustrated that they supported poor management. You are asking someone to make things right on something people are gonna bitch about no matter what happens. You can see what I mean when people were complaining that btc wasn't returned yet. Btc starts to be returned, now its something else. He was not communicating, he releases an interview with most questions being answered, people calls bullshit on every word. And then you see people say stuff like "assets should have been dissolved in btc and returned to shareholders"..... OK, those btc that were used to buy shares were used by the issuer.... so apparently he should have made btc appear from thin air and pay everyone value based on market confidence? He felt the need to close, which no one has any control over that. He did not wish to pursue running glbse. That involves a lot of constraints for a lot of people, but he was allowed to do so, so stop crying about that. |
|
|
|
I just assume Nefario is acting in bad faith untill I see something official from the lawyer.
And what would actually be the difference? That you believe you could get prosecuted or that you are advice that you are subject to prosecution pretty much calls for the same course of actions. And if he were to get legal actions from the SEC or similar entities, the fact that he unknowingly (which does not make you not-guilty) committed a crime and ceased operation when he got enlightened (with advice or not), would go in his favor big time, especially considering the crime itself was one with no permanent damage. If you like taking that much risk, just go to high rollers section of casino and sign your bank tab and go all in. The guy took a decision to put his life out of the cross hair. Not for greed, power or reconision. If it were for those reasons, people would not see those bitcoins in their wallets right now. Seems he only paid out a few token small accounts twice and then quit paying. We will need to see if he pays out the rest. I'm getting very, very tired of reading posts justifying James' actions. They're not even funny. He was in business to make a buck and people who are making a buck have responsibilities. Period. Then he decides to close shop suddenly and unilaterally, taking everyone's money with him and rendering assets worthless. [He could've closed shop and let everyone take out their money, assets could've been dissolved as well into BTC at current value.] Now he's redefining the term clusterfuck so deeply arms manufacturers might hire him as a designer. [This will, of course, literally explode on their faces.] But still, people stand up for him, incl. people that have lost btc over this and probably will never get them back. Wtf? I'm a positive person but... Goat, I bet we won't see any of that. Well, maybe something... but all in this schizophrenic, double-or-nothing, highly entropic way. I am not seeking to defend him as much as pointing out to people that they are crying about the wrong shit. See the post I quoted.... like wtf... who gives a damn. Bit coin.me would be a happy camper if he had a lawyers signature on paper? No... just anything and everything to attack someone. Attack him for what he did, not for what he didn't do or what PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DONE THEMSELVES. |
|
|
|
I just assume Nefario is acting in bad faith untill I see something official from the lawyer.
And what would actually be the difference? That you believe you could get prosecuted or that you are advice that you are subject to prosecution pretty much calls for the same course of actions. And if he were to get legal actions from the SEC or similar entities, the fact that he unknowingly (which does not make you not-guilty) committed a crime and ceased operation when he got enlightened (with advice or not), would go in his favor big time, especially considering the crime itself was one with no permanent damage. If you like taking that much risk, just go to high rollers section of casino and sign your bank tab and go all in. The guy took a decision to put his life out of the cross hair. Not for greed, power or reconision. If it were for those reasons, people would not see those bitcoins in their wallets right now. |
|
|
|
|
We both interprets that post in different ways, to me, saying as an update that "we have received 88 emails from you guys" is totally irrelevant considering if you sent an email, you sent an email, you sent an email. Only way it would be relevant at all is if we personally know the amount claims that were sent vs received to see if the data is matching. So perhaps this needs clarification from friedcat. Are those claims you received from GLBSE or from individual emails?.
I also see the "we have not been contacted by GLBSE" as in they did not receive instructions or compensation. I do not concider forwarded asset info as a form of contact.
|
|
|
|
Update
shareholders
Till now we have received and processed 88 claims.
|
|
|
|
Operating an illegal securities exchange and then laundering money through it would easily meet the bar for racketeering.
that is not even remotely related to racketeering, even less Rico... |
|
|
|
So when does goat get a scammer tag for defending nefario?
Oh no... Nefario is a scammer, but cuz he took my assets I bought on GLBSE! theft is scamming~ I want Nefario to have the tag for the right reason... Jesus Christ. Fine. He gets it for your reason and Theymos's reason both. Someone lock this thread already. Someone seems to have better morals than another. Goat is able to make good judgement about someone even though he has a personal beef against that person. Other people cry and invent stories about a justified action. If you wanna cry, cry for the right reasons. Bottomline, does nefario's action of closing glbse affect some people, yeah. Does it make it illegal or perhaps worth his risk? Most likely not. You do realize he that to save his butt when he saw the imminence of legal actions taken against that that would have also resulted in WORSE outcome for issuers and holders, right?.. oh yeah, probably not. |
|
|
|
|
As far as I know, he does get the asset info forwarded to him (perhaps aumatically). Other than that he is waiting on the actual "way to transfer the assets to another platform" and the btc was forwarded to him after the IPO was closed (that's what I got from reading and assuming).
And gabit, you want what, an email answering "ok"?..
|
|
|
|
Claim sent along with screenshot of my portfolio page at GLBSE. Thescreenshot was taken just after the site went down.
I wish I knew how to install adobe Photoshop to add 00 at the end of my ss The GIMP is free http://www.gimp.org/ sorry, I thought the sarcasm was obvious, my bad I guess... |
|
|
|
I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc".
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people, how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc. Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.
So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828Why are you spamming the forums, EskimoBob? who's posting totally pointless post strictly aiming the poster and not the content?.... |
|
|
|
Claim sent along with screenshot of my portfolio page at GLBSE. Thescreenshot was taken just after the site went down.
I wish I knew how to install adobe Photoshop to add 00 at the end of my ss |
|
|
|
Yea looks like people are starting to get back small amounts but no word... seems suspect.
exactly the point of my posts.... "good shit happens" oh fuck were screwed |
|
|
|
nefario is forced to testify in a grand jury.. otherwise he'll get 18 months in prison.
Nefario's not even in the US. There's no such thing as a grand jury in the UK where he is. @Deprived We use a thing called extradition here...... but I'm not sure if that applies where you live. Extradition? You mean on a securities fraud crime that had no direct negative effect (and probably indirect either) AND for a crime on UK soil... Those are all very unlikely... And a grand jury?... lol try a ADA |
|
|
|
Honestly that's pretty weird. Zero liability for credit theft is not a credit card policy, its actually federal law. I don't wanna argue because I don't know the details, but the cc company seems to have failed to comply with federal laws in your case.
Oh? What federal law code section says that card limits have to be reset to pre fraud amounts? Which law section says you cannot stab someone 3 times in the leg, 4 in the chest, 2 in the arms? ... You are not LIABLE for credit card fraud. Dictionary the word in caps. |
|
|
|
|
Honestly that's pretty weird. Zero liability for credit theft is not a credit card policy, its actually federal law. I don't wanna argue because I don't know the details, but the cc company seems to have failed to comply with federal laws in your case.
|
|
|
|
...
That being said.... most startup companies do not IPO on an exchange but get funding from angel investors and seeding capital
Those shares are privately held until the valuation of the company is big enough to go onto an exchange
For some companies the most ROI is made during the private investor period, so when the shares can only change hands privately instead of publicly
Then they IPO the company at a high value and everyone of the first investors is happy
Yep, and they hold onto that extremely profitable and privileged position with an iron grip. Its a shame GLBSE is gone but it threatened that position and so was very vulnerable. I'm not sure if open transactions is stable enough for something like asicminer yet but would be interested to hear friedcat's thoughts on it. That is a big reason why I do not like dividends. Forcing people to have to actually offer someone else a chance at a share in order to "cash out" avoids the price/value going up and down in sawtoothed waves as dividend day approaches and hits and helps create opportunities for later adopters to get in. -MarkM- and guess what happens then? Value likely increases. Making active trading even more valuable. |
|
|
|
damnit. i must have just missed the processing period. i got the login screen but after putting in my email and payout address i got a 404. now the front page says: Update:we are currently unable to process account closures, and will inform our users when this service resumes. OK, you've got my attention. I'll gladly take any brainstorming from people on what can be done with my electric bill, my ID and a picture of me with the date, my login & e-mail... #1) Seriously, what could happen? #2) And what can I do about it now? I'm pretty sure the answer to #1 is not too much (fingers crossed). but I'm even more sure the answer to #2 is nothing... gah, I guess this had to happen sooner or later. Perhaps I should cancel or put a hold on my credit lines? Any other ideas? Nefario has enough to open an online bank account in your name. Plus hand your pic over to the grand jury. Thank you for your thoughts & comments. So Nefario can open an online bank account in my name. This would show up on my credit report; so I can call the credit agency and have them lock down my credit line, so that only unlocking it would allow a new line of credit to be opened. This costs $5 or something to turn on and off I think (based on what a co-worker told me). However, say I don't do this, then what? I guess he could open the account and try to over draft it and then peace out? Then this would make me look bad and hit my credit as a default? Hopefully, no institution would let more than $1,000 ish go like this. I'll be making enough with bitcoins that I won't have to worry about silly fiat credit lines anyway... at least that's the plan for now. Anything I'm missing? As for the stock portfolio account in a country I don't know existed; not sure what other issues could happen with that. Seems like people keep offshore accounts and don't go to jail all the time. However, if someone were to link me with the account in the next 2 years (that's when my license will expire), there should be a trail of where the money came from. Good thing I'm not involved with online anonymous digital currency/commodities that could have gotten the money there untraceable... heh, oh well. I'm not too worried of the risk just yet. Perhaps, I'll lock my credit report since I don't need credit. I've already got my house mortgage refinanced & won't be needing any additional debt anytime soon. You are never liable for any theft from your credit card company. Even if someone has all the information necessary, if ultimately if it wasn't you, you are not liable. And in most cases you don't really have to prove that it wasn't you, they have to prove it was you. (Camera, voice recognition, signature, address and/or pick up etc etc) Right, so having my utility bill and license and picture of me with my e-mail/login/date could potentially help someone not me "prove" or provide the "proof" that the credit card company needs. Regardless, it may show up as a "ding" on my "credit report/score" and I don't know what the implications of that would be. YOU file a claim for fraud. Regardless of the information or documentation they had, once you file a claim, why would he "prove" them anything? Bottom line, card/info stolen and fraudulent charges are made, you file a claim, you get your money back. Your credit is unaffected. The stories you hear about peoples credit getting ruined is when someone basically steals your whole identity and uses it a while and opens lines of credits and loans under your identity. After a while your credit will be ruined and that's how you will learn about it, and again, you file a claim, and then its restored. The worst it can be is slightly inconvenient, probably even a little less inconvenient than worrying about it and crying about an harmless situation. I had my identity stolen. After I fixed all of the fradulent things with the 3 major credit agencies, I then asked my actual credit card companies to put the limits on my cards back to where they were (since they were radically lowered which is how I found out about the new cards/accounts that were overdrawn/maxed) not one bank/credit card company restored my card limits to where they were before the whole mess (that took about a year to straighten out). My limits today, 5 years later, are still lower then before the mess. My credit is still affected to this day. Don't act like it all gets magically fixed once you clear up the mess, and that the mess doesn't cost you time and money to straighten out. Getting your identity stolen totally sucks. Don't wanna go too off-topic, but may I ask if around that time or slightly before you might have into small financial difficulties (don't wanna be indiscrete either). Reason I ask is because usually when you get approved for increased limits, they will not decrease your credit line if you just have small financial difficulties (couple months late, and making occasional payments), but after going through identity theft I wouldn't be surprised they re-run your credit minus the theft. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
