Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 05:31:17 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 ... 118 »
581  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 14, 2012, 01:25:42 AM
I try to keep my contracts short and free of legalese. Real world contracts are really long because many people are greedy and sue-happy and willing to sell out their own mother for a nickel. I prefer to do business on a handshake and a smile.


What's it going to take to add a few lines to all of my contracts?

"In the event of exceptional circumstances not precisely covered in this contract, latitude and authority rests with the asset issuer to freely determine and decide the procedure to mitigate the situation at hand. Anything not explicitly covered in this contract remains in the domain and control of the asset issuer alone."

I also want that text added to DMC's contract to prevent future interference from non-shareholders.
582  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 14, 2012, 01:24:42 AM
Having a look over the DMC contract and this is interesting.

Looks like you shareholders are pretty much fucked.

First, there's this

Quote
Percent of majority   
to change contract:   66
for general motion:   66
to issue shares:   0

Seems Diablo can pump out shares pretty much as he wants.

Also, I believe the zero is a result of a GLSBE bug, I remember reading that Diablo never planned on issuing extra shares.

Not a bug. I put 0 in that field, and nefario agreed to that, as did every shareholder.
583  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 14, 2012, 01:23:09 AM
To make sure everyone sees nefario's motion

https://glbse.com/vote/view/127

Click NO if you believe that I should remain CEO of Diablo Mining Company.
584  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 14, 2012, 12:02:52 AM
Having a look over the DMC contract and this is interesting.

Looks like you shareholders are pretty much fucked.

First, there's this

Quote
Percent of majority   
to change contract:   66
for general motion:   66
to issue shares:   0

Seems Diablo can pump out shares pretty much as he wants.

Then there's this

Quote
Each share represents 0% of the ownership in the company assets.

You ain't got nothin.

And last but not least

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.

You forgot the part where nefario signed off on this contract when I opened the IPO to begin with, and every investor agreed to this contract when they invested.
585  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 14, 2012, 12:01:09 AM

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.

This now invalid, because it seems that DiabloD3 has breached the contract several times.

How have I breached the contract? Just saying "because I said so" or "because nefario said so" doesn't make it true.
I did not said you breached the contract, but it seems so.
And Nefario has the right to disable your access, unless you proof otherwise.

Guilty until proven innocent. I wasn't aware GLBSE was hosted in Soviet Russia.
Don't be silly. He has the right to disable your access, because there is suspected fraud.
Untill the fraud is proven, you cannot be held responsible.
On the other hand your account will never get unblocked, if you don't assist in the investigation.

So whats the Fifth Amendment for?
586  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 11:43:19 PM

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.

This now invalid, because it seems that DiabloD3 has breached the contract several times.

How have I breached the contract? Just saying "because I said so" or "because nefario said so" doesn't make it true.
I did not said you breached the contract, but it seems so.
And Nefario has the right to disable your access, unless you proof otherwise.

Guilty until proven innocent. I wasn't aware GLBSE was hosted in Soviet Russia.
587  Other / CPU/GPU Bitcoin mining hardware / Re: DiabloMiner GPU Miner (LP, BFI_INT, async nw, multipool, 79xx GCN) on: September 13, 2012, 11:41:05 PM
".. or immediately if connection is refused" ---you mean for example "...cant connect to server.." ? some times some pool have "...cant connect to server.." 20 sec in my test Sad((

100 minutes was chosen because it is optimal as it is the average length of downtime spent on unplanned maintenance inside of a data center. ----   so i can or not reduce 100min?   for me is very important Sad((
                  After what time diablo go back to first pool ?

Pools that don't use passwords allow anything in the password field.--- i must use "-p first pas," or "-p first pas" -with comma or not?


will you support "asic mining" in future? I and many people hope , that you will support. Thx for realy good product!

DiabloMiner won't switch if the pool is still up. As long as your pool never goes down, you don't have an issue.

-p first,xxx works for most people

DiabloMiner will never support fpga or asic mining unless someone makes raw USB access not suck in Java. If you want that, use cgminer, it's essentially DiabloMiner ported to C.
588  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 10:41:11 PM

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.

This now invalid, because it seems that DiabloD3 has breached the contract several times.

How have I breached the contract? Just saying "because I said so" or "because nefario said so" doesn't make it true.
589  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 10:32:00 PM
I object to a puppet account uninspiringly named puppet who has less than 100 posts and is not even a month old and frequently trolls in threads elsewhere on the forum.

I dont care if you object to that. My postcount is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that you accepted 1000's of other people's coins, including some of mine, you managed to make 95% of our value vanish, you breached our contract and you refuse to release the records that would show exactly what happened.

How did I breach the contract?

Also, I refuse to release the records because I do not have permission from every person I've traded with to release said information. Just because they traded with me does not mean their privacy should be violated because nefario wants to exceed his authority.
590  Other / CPU/GPU Bitcoin mining hardware / Re: DiabloMiner GPU Miner (LP, BFI_INT, async nw, multipool, 79xx GCN) on: September 13, 2012, 09:37:50 PM
Questions about  multipool.

how much time after "there is no answer from first pool" diablo go to the second pool?

"DiabloMiner will automatically return to the first pool every 100 minutes." ----how i can reduce "100 minutes" Huh?

"-u foo,bar -p baz,quux -o pool1,pool2 -r 3336,3337" ---what if i dont have password on second pool?

DiabloMiner switches pools after about 15 seconds or immediately if connection is refused.

100 minutes was chosen because it is optimal as it is the average length of downtime spent on unplanned maintenance inside of a data center.

Pools that don't use passwords allow anything in the password field.
591  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 08:05:15 PM
I cannot simply release the CSV for any account without the account owners permission.

There is a motion now up available for voting, it has 5 days to vote on
https://glbse.com/vote/view/126

IF you have DMC shares please vote.

Also, I will need someone to audit the CSV and account to work out a basic profit and loss(balance sheet is easy), and a simple report. There will be a couple of bitcoin for the completion of this task(paid out of GLBSE's pocket).

Nefario.



Wrong asset and 0% to pass means already passed.
592  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 07:52:13 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?

Shareholder that you virtually gave shares to  from the unsold pool for like 0.01BTC, or shareholder that actually purchased your shares?
Regardless, just answer the question: do you object to the records being published or not? If you have nothing to hide, why would you?

I object to nefario trying to destroy DMC based on rumors and without shareholder approval.

So you object to shareholders finding out what you did exactly with their money?

I object to a puppet account uninspiringly named puppet who has less than 100 posts and is not even a month old and frequently trolls in threads elsewhere on the forum.
593  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 07:41:09 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?

Shareholder that you virtually gave shares to  from the unsold pool for like 0.01BTC, or shareholder that actually purchased your shares?
Regardless, just answer the question: do you object to the records being published or not? If you have nothing to hide, why would you?

I object to nefario trying to destroy DMC based on rumors and without shareholder approval.
594  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Insurance - Butterfly Labs BitForce SC Insurance (6,390:24,680) on: September 13, 2012, 07:14:47 PM
Yeah this is why this is horribly organized.  As it stands BFL coul announce they won't be able to ship until November (guaranteeing the .fail stock wins) and people could still continue buying more .fail stocks right up until all were sold - meaning no real profit for anyone who actually invested at the start.

Shares were to be stop being sold the second it becomes October 1st. If BFL were to announce they failed before then, sales would have been halted as well.

Because of nefario, if BFL were to announce their failure, I cannot halt sales.

First we had zhou tong, then we had pirate, now we have nefario. Does this shit ever end?


Your OP doesn't allow you stop selling shares before october 1st - and your model doesn't allow people to react to new information becoming available.

Say BFL announced today "it's looking unlikely we'll be able to ship on time."   That's not enough to settle the bet - but definitely adds a lot of weight to one side of it.

Would you then want to lock shares?  If so then where do you draw the line? If not, then buying shares at any time before significant new information becoems available is a mug's game - with no benefit for early adopters (just an opportunity cost of tied up funds + the certainty they'll be gamed by others once more information becomes available).

Your model fails because it gives no benefit for early adoption - just massive penalties.  You should have used a model like the one I described previously - where initial prices for each side of the bet are determined on current knowledge then the market allows adjustment of position as new information is revealed.

I would not pay out until October 31st, I would only halt share sales. The same goes for if BFL shipped today, share sales also halt.
595  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 07:13:26 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

The csv could potentially contain legitimate personal transactions. Privacy issues abound.
Diablo has both claimed to have personal holdings, and to have no holdings except those under DMC control.
What the truth is, who knows...

I have never claimed to have a personal portfolio. I only have one account. I only own shares in DMC. When I said I put all the money I have into DMC, I wasn't kidding.
596  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 07:08:40 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?
597  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 07:04:56 PM
[03:25:13] <Diablo-D3> dmc will continue with or without the missing assets

If you said that then you're living in a fantasy world.  The only assets you've ever disclosed are the ones that are locked at the moment.  Without them DMC has no assets.  How can you 'continue' DMC with zero assets (not to mention no record of share-holders etc).

DMC has so few assets (only a handful of different stocks) that in an ideal world (if Diablo isn't given back control) they'd just be liquidated and the funds used to buy-out all shares.  DMC appears to have no intangible assets, goodwill or similar giving any compelling reason for it to continue to exist as an entity.  Unfortunately that's in an ideal world - and would be hard to achieve due to the total lack of liquidity at any reasonable price on the investments.

Not at all. I am going ahead with the dedicated server and cloud service sales if I can. The plan was structured in a way that if any single revenue stream is damaged, the company survives through the others.

No BTC from DMC has gone into the web hosting service project, and until this is up and running and people could order services, I was not going to mention it officially to shareholders. usagi, rapeghost, and several others were aware of it unofficially.

The dedi side of the sales could easily be a 2-3 BTC profit (half of that going to shareholders) per customer.  15-20 customers could double dividends, and I think the market could be several times bigger than that.
598  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 06:50:46 PM
I believe my shareholders have a right to know.

I think your shareholders have a right first and foremost to know what exactly you did with their bitcoins. All the rest is a sideshow drama.

I invested them in companies that I believe can return the most value. I believe our investment in ABMO and ASICMINER is sound. Although the fixed mhash bond fiasco wiped out some of our money, this does not change the end goal, it just means we will take a little longer to get there.

I believe in DMC, and I've invested my own money into this alongside everyone else's because I believe. I will continue trying to make this a reality no matter what hardship occurs, this is what it means to believe in something.
599  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 06:31:52 PM
Yet you refuse to open this fake motion of yours and are already conspiring to put usagi in as the new CEO against shareholder wishes? You have already irreparably harmed the company: the only one that needs to be investigated is you.

You're delusional.

You admitted in privmsg on IRC about a week or two ago that if I didn't do exactly what you said that you'd do something, although you wouldn't say what. I thought you were just drunk or high, so I ignored it.

Now I know why you were trying to stall negotiations of you taking over asset management for DMC, you were already planning this entire thing with nefario. You claimed it was because you didn't like the fact I owned half of OBSI.ABMO (which you later said, in public*, Obsi was a scammer on #bitcoin-assets, and Obsi is a well respected member of this community).

Where does the bullshit end? Are you going to claim BTC-Mining and Yochdog are scammers too? Or friedcat? Anyone who I've ever invested in? Where does it end?

*
Quote
[10:38:41] <usagi> Boy am I glad I started selling out my OBSI earlier before the crash
[10:38:53] <usagi> No way I'm getting stuck in another ponzi but now I'm trapped
[10:38:58] <usagi> I have like, several thousand shares to sell
[10:39:03] <usagi> and it's under .1

What the hell does that have to say about anything? So I was trying to sell some HRPT? So? Why do you keep trying to bring Obsi into this? And BTW Obsi and I have had our differences but we made up so to speak, do you realize what a doofus you sound like saying that? I would never say that about Obsi.

Are you high?

When I talked to Obsi yesterday, he sure as hell didn't believe you've made up your differences.  You told me you didn't want to take DMC's asset management on because I held OBSI.ABMO.

So are you saying you misspoke or that I am remembering it wrong? If that wasn't your reason, why did you tell me that, and what was your real reason? I believe my shareholders have a right to know.
600  Economy / Securities / Re: [GLBSE] Diablo Mining Company (DMC) [140.1 gh] [6.700 mh/share] on: September 13, 2012, 06:27:26 PM
Just agree to the audit, or disappear and let the shareholders move forward.

The only thing I will agree to is scammer tags for all of nefario's and usagi's forum accounts.

Unless nefario backs down and apologizes to DMC's shareholders, there is nothing for the shareholders to move forwards to. The money is gone forever. Even if the shareholders vote to retain me as CEO, nefario will just change the motion to say otherwise and liquidate the assets at any price he sees fit.

If shareholders believe in the DMC plan and wish to see it completed, then they will do everything possible to make nefario return the stolen assets. Voting on the motion isn't enough.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 ... 118 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!