Great stuff here.  Two other resources that I found helpful: /r/notDogcoinFUD and network23.org/dogecoin.

There is a smattering of facts and possible leads about these folks at network23.org/dogecoin. 

VeryCharity is pleased to announce The RevUp Render Lunar Iditarod (revuprender.com/lunariditarod), a multi-stage moon rover design and robotics competition. The final stage will feature three DogeSleds racing on the surface of the moon.

This is a team competition with a requirement that the rovers be dogecoin themed - designed and built to take dogecoin to the moon. The entry fees for the competition will be payable only in dogecoin.

The rules for each stage of the competition will be announced approximately one month prior to said stage. There will be a comment period before registration opens.

The competition will be judged by members of the aerospace industry, the dogecoin community and others. We're pleased to announce that Jackson Palmer has agreed to be a judge.

This competition is sponsored by RevUp Render Inc. and produced by Team Phoenicia, Inc.. Very Charity Inc is advising on the dogecoin elements of the competition.

Stay tuned for future announcements.

To the Moon!

Since its no longer April 1st where I'm at, thought I'd make another announcement: we now taking dogecoin (in addition to bitcoin and litecoin).  Also, we've added a number products since I last posted and gotten ourselves in the WoT at MPOE-PR's suggestion.

Good suggestion.  Thanks!

Hey there. 

Just wanted to drop a line about a project I've been working on with my wife for the last couple of weeks called "TransHash" (transhash.com). TransHash is an online retail store exclusively for users of Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Dogecoin (Dogecoin payments starting next week).

We've worked hard at establishing relationships with various manufacturers and suppliers to obtain access to inventory. These relationships are evolving, and a lot more are on the horizon.

We'd appreciate some feedback on our site and offerings: good, bad or ugly. If there's a type of product you'd like buy with your digital currency, please let us know here or elsewhere - we're eager to serve.

NOTES

1. We're open and taking Bitcoin and Litecoin at the moment - we'll open it up to Dogecoin next week.

2. Only a small fraction of our inventory is online right now, but what's there will give you a flavor for what we're up to. We're populating the site as quickly as possible, but it can be slow going with busy jobs and an outdoor-loving 2yr old (we're open to demand dictating TransHash becoming one or both of our primary jobs).

3. I'm looking for a phone solution - if you'd like to speak with us on the phone before we post a number, send us an email via our contact page and we'll call.

4. Email us with questions.

I don't have much knowledge of Bitcoin before this fall (the season; no pun intended), but I'll take a look at that article.  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your first reply was something like, "that's completely incorrect." I would have been more inclined to double check my answer earlier had you said: 'that's not correct. Subpoenas can come before someone is charged with a crime.'  In any case, good talking with you.  

"Your point which I disagreed with was that there have to be charges (or a civil case) before there's a subpoena."

Actually, I think I qualified my statement by saying "I think" or something to that effect.  But whatever, it's all good and I learned a little something about Grand Jury Subpoenas (which is cool). The purpose of my initial post was to raise the possibility that Gox/Mk may not be the direct targets of the alleged subpoena (i.e., that the subpoena is related to another case). I believe you actually agreed with this.

Suggestion: next time, say "why" you disagree instead of asserting it without any explanation.  That'll save us time in getting to the right answer.





 

Here's a decent summary for criminal procedure at the federal level (from the Minnesota US Attorney's office):

http://www.justice.gov/usao/mn/criminal_proc.html  

Anth0ny, you're right, civil litigation and criminal law are different.  But, subpoenas are common to both, but I suppose they can be used differently.

EDIT: I conducted a little research on this issue. Two things: we've only heard about a "subpoena," not a "Grand Jury Subpoena." I believe persons suspected of a crime and that are being investigated for said crime may need a Grand Jury Subpoena to be compelled to testify at a hearing. Grand Jury Subpoenas of a target in an investigation require the approval of the grand jury itself as well as a US Attorney or AG.  

From the US Attorney's Criminal Resource Manual (Chapter on Grand Juries, Section Subpoenaing a Target of an Investigation): "If a voluntary appearance cannot be obtained, the target should be subpoenaed only after the grand jury and the United States Attorney or the responsible Assistant Attorney General have approved the subpoena."  

Here, it sounds like MK or Gox got served with a regular subpoena (but I guess we don't really know). If that's the case, I think my initial point still stands - either there are charges against them or its for somebody else's case. But even if the subpoena is a Grand Jury Subpoena where MK or Gox are the targets, there would have been some kind of proceeding first to secure the subpoena since the Grand Jury's approval is required. In that case, my statement about "charges" being a requirement is not accurate.  

Great argument.

No, I do not agree.

I will graciously concede the argument and admit that I'm wrong if you can show me a rule of court procedure that shows me I'm wrong (no ill-will or ego, here).  Until then, I'm going to go with what I know from my own experience as an attorney who practices a fair amount of civil litigation.  

I'm also going to go with this theory: there is a federal criminal case pending where the Defendant (XXX) engaged in a fair amount of trading at Mt. Gox and the prosecutors want to discover information related to those trades for their case against XXX. 

I think grand juries are designed to indict suspects on preliminary evidence. If an indictment results, a warrant for arrest is issued.  Congress would not be involved in this matter if a US Attorney is involved (i.e., Dept. of Justice =/= Legislature).

Fair enough.  Kindly show me the rule from the federal rules of civil procedure.

In cases that I'm in, if the opposing party won't come to a deposition or hearing, I file a motion to compel - not a subpoena.  However, if I need to depose a non-party, I get a subpoena to ensure they'll come testify or produce documents. Maybe its different where you practice.

FWIW, the subpoena may be for his testimony in a case unrelated MTG's operations directly. Also, I think there must be a pending suit in a civil matter or charges filed in a criminal matter before a subpoena can be issued (the suit or charges are against someone one else, you don't get subpoenaed to testify in a case in which you're already a party). His options are to quash the subpoena or take a free trip to where ever he has to go and give testimony/deliver documents in lieu of a trip. Don't read too much into this.

Also, for your reading pleasure: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1783

Thanks, appreciate the feedback.

I know very little about TA, but I try to follow the threads here and learn what I can.  So, quick question: am I seeing a cup and handle on stamp (via bitcoin wisdom)?

My mistake, when Wisdom came back on I failed to put it back to Stamp from BTC-e.  Still working on the first cup of coffee.

Did the big sell off record disappear from BTC Wisdom?  It was there, then BTC Wisdom went down for 30 secs or so, then it was gone. Weird.

 

With all due respect, nobody needs to make any rash assumptions because the facts speak for themselves.  One fact that really irks me is that you changed your story about your company having produced working 20 nm chips. The reference to 20 nm was on your website, you got called on it, then your website was changed, and then you denied having made the representation in the first place. I provided pictures that prove the reference to 20 nm chips.

Your only defense now is to say the website contained a typo or that you're not in charge of web design, neither of which are likely to be persuasive given the difference between 20nm and 28nm as well as the current race to 20 nm.  Please explain this discrepancy if you can.