Dude how about answering my post?

all you have to do is buy back the existing bonds and offer a trade-in for those who want to participate under the new contract.

Still waiting for an answer to my 2 emails from over a week ago btw.

They contain all you need to pay me (except the new funny requirements, id n stuff).

gigavps, Why do you think Nafario only gave G1GAVPS a partial list?

Where is the list of who's gotten info so far.  I know gigavps has, what other issuers?  A few posts back said that 10 issuers had been notified.

Also the unprofessional outbursts that Tom and Inaba have at times just adds to that.

And thank you for replying promptly and substantively.

(1) Since the secure storage for the SSNs is still being built, and I don't really know anything about Quentin's security except that he doesn't have a public key, I'm not really comfortable e-mailing him my SSN right now.  Would you prefer it if I:

(2) Since the photo ID requirement is just for a generic governmental-issued document, I assume you'll just need to verify that it looks like a real ID and matches my address, date of birth, etc. Would there be any issue with me obscuring my DL# and other unique card identifier in the image, since I think your lawyers don't really need it, and (at least in my state), it often gets used like an SSN or account access card for many things?  I have the impression there has been a rash of people forging DLs with working magnetic stripe and using them at places that have replaced vendor-specific ID cards with DL swipes.

but I have to echo those above who are curious about how you would actually do that.

However, I do think it is very important that you provide up front some detail on how you intend to establish fair market value. My intention has been (unless I find out this is wrong) to check the MtGox value at the time of each dividend and report that dollar value as income.  By recording the dollar value of the BTC I paid for a share at the time of share purchase, and the dollar value of the BTC I get back from a share at share sale, I can properly report my capital gain or loss.

It would be bad for everybody if mismatches started cropping up based on different ideas of BTC market value because of differences in averaging over time, or even looking at a different time on the same day, when the BTC price might have been volatile.  You don't want to have people disputing a 1099 in some kind of four-way cluster---- between a shareholder, you, your lawyer, and the IRS. This could very easily happen if your lawyers are not well-versed in complex securities issues.

We also, of course, need a lot more assurance than we have right now about the protection of our tax ID information.  This is a matter of routine for anyone asking for an SSN, as you know. But you also know as well as anybody that Bitcoin attracts very smart criminals and vandals who would just love the idea of dumping a gold mine of SSNs of shareholders from all over the community because they were held on an excel spreadsheet in the office of an issue-inexperienced lawyer who got in way over his head IT-security-wise.

So I don't fundamentally have a problem with the basic idea of what you're doing.  But I think that there is space here to have legitimate concerns at this point about how it's being done and by whom.

I guess we know where all the pirate ponzi profits got funnelled into at least.

no. thanks! 

ftfy

If you think anyone will send you thousands more bitcoins while glbse mess is still happening youre kidding yourself.

In response to some of the questions and concerns raised by some members of the bitcoin/gigamining community to the information and documentation requested in the prior posting, Virtual Processing Solutions, LLC (hereinafter VPS), wished to provide the explanation and justification for these requests.

The information requested can be broadly divided into three principal categories:

• Bitcoin payment address.
• Identity information/documentation.
• Affidavit of beneficial assignment.

There does not generally appear to be much concern over the issue of bitcoin payment addresses.  This information has been requested to facilitate ultimate payment of the bitcoins and to allow reconciliation with known outstanding obligations.

Identity information/documentation seems to be among the most controversial of the requested information.  This information is necessary for VPS to obtain and maintain for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, compliance with tax regulations of the US and foreign jurisdictions (both for recipients and VPS), compliance with the regulations of the US Treasury Office of Foreign Asset Control, and protection against, and remediation in the event of, fraudulent claims.

When considering these requirements, please keep several points in mind.  The triggering threshold for US IRS 1099 (or IRS 1042 for foreign residents) earnings are extremely modest (ranging from US $10 to $600 depending on the classification ultimately assigned by taxing authorities) and the ultimate value of the bitcoins from now until the close of the filing period is unknown.  It is also worth noting that, due to the nature of the contract, these proceeds could be considered interest income which can have a triggering threshold as low as US $10.

A number of foreign locations are currently under embargo by the United States, ranging from full (in the case of Cuba and Sudan) to partial (including Iran, Burma, Syria, and North Korea).  In many cases the regulations prohibit the transfer of any negotiable or liquid commodities to target countries.  In all such cases, the law establishes the clear responsibility of the transferring party to maintain a compliance program which includes, at a minimum due diligence in establishing the identity of the recipient.  Criminal violations of the statutes carry a penalty of twelve years in prison and fines of US $1,000,000 in additional to independent civil penalties of $1,075,000 per count. 

The affidavit is to provide assurance that all submitted information is true and correct, and to provide protection for VPS against fraudulent claims of assignment. It is worth noting in this matter, that prior to the shut-down of GLBSE, VPS had not maintained independent records of contract assignment, nor do unique tracking numbers for individual contracts exist.  Under such circumstances, the potential for multiple parties to claim beneficial assignment of contracts is manifest, and GLBSE cannot be counted on to provide resolution of conflicting claims or indemnify VPS in the event that the wrong party is paid.  While VPS cannot speak to the cost of the foreign equivalence of notarization (apostille), in the US, such services are available free of charge to account holders at most major US banks, and are otherwise available for minimal (US $20 approx.) fees.

It is absolutely incorrect to assert that these information and documentation requests are to avoid VPS’s obligations under extant contracts, and, in fact, the information requested is no more detailed or onerous than what is generally required to open a brokerage or bank account.

Finally, some concern has been raised that VPS is attempting to change the terms of the original contract.  This is, in fact, precisely the opposite of both the intent and effect of the efforts VPS is undertaking in this matter.  Specifically, the original contract is extremely limited in its text and terms, leaving many issues unresolved, including, most basically, who is a party to the contract (i.e. the identity of the issuer and beneficial assignee).  These omissions alone could possibly cause the contract to be unenforceable, not merely on technical grounds, but because of the practical difficulties in establishing the parties to whom payment is due. 

Further, under US law, contracts are always subordinate to the law of the governing jurisdictions (i.e. where law and contract conflict, the law prevails).  To remedy this known issue, many contracts, include clauses to allow courts to redraw contracts to conform to existing laws to prevent their wholesale invalidation due to conflict with governing law (so called “blue pencil” authorization).  No such clause exists in the written contracts at issue.  Nevertheless, VPS has deliberately chosen to attempt, at its own substantial cost, to remedy both of these limitations in the existing contract, by allowing identification of the parties post de facto, and acting as though blue pencil clauses existed to bring the terms of the contract into compliance with US and State law.  Neither of these actions is explicitly required of VPS by law, nor in VPS’s proximate financial interest, but are nonetheless being undertaken to maintain good faith with the bitcoin/gigamining community.

One question - is there more info from Nefario regarding shares of accounts with double payment?

Still awaiting reply to email sent to James cc to Lawyers email on 23rd November

Other bond issuers have returned my BTC without jumping through these ridiculous hurdles

43 mining bonds doesn't breach any AML/KYC regulations

Does this include the PDF your talking about?

Naelr

Tomorrow, gave it a week for his lawyer to respond that is up then.

I too am wondering about the PDF because I'm wanting to make sure the language used is what you're looking for.

Also, any updates possible on the process for holders with few shares?

What it means if I can't find my email here:
http://gigamining.com/glbse-records.html

Is it list of (emails and BTCaddresses) or (emails or BTCaddresses)?

Just to get clear there is any word on language of documents for claims, I can get only Polish documents which looks correct according to http://gigamining.com/claims.html because it is my "local equivalent".

And what exactly I will gain if procedure will be completed? After that I will be able to use my dividends? Would you use part of contract and buyback shares? Will I get my teramining upgrade?
I'm asking because If I will have pay for authorized translator cost of it will exceed my dividends.