 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »
|
Just to be clear, the only differences between monero and this coin are:
1 - 10% premine
2 - minimum mixin of 12 enforced from start of network
3 - emission curve
4 - ?
Are there plans to diverge further, or just continue merging changes from monero?
We'll work in both ways. Important innovations from upstream must be merged to Sumokoin for the best features. Ofc, we have our own vision for the coin, at least, it would be better privacy, easier to start atm. On the other hand, we'll focus more on ecosystem like wallets, mobile, merchant APIs etc. It'll take time for the coin to gain more traction from community and for devs to implement better wallets, tools etc but we'll do that with high responsibility and long-term commitment. I have been watching the Sumokoin and Monero threads for a couple of months now as part of my due diligence research, and I think you have correctly identified "ecosystem" as Monero's main weakness in relation to Bitcoin. I seem to keep coming back to this part of the Sumokoin mission statement though - - Do you have any relationship with The Monero Project?
- No. While we have full respect for all core developers of The Monero Project who are competent, open and smart, however, we've never had opportunity to contribute anything to Monero yet (we hope we will).
Why have Sumokoin developers been unable to work with the Monero team on improving the ecosystem? Excellent question. We always want to contribute back to Monero projects. Atm, we can only contribute patches to Monero core when possible. When we have more matured tools/ideas, we surely work with Monero if they are ready to cooperate but I think it may only happen in the next 6 months or so. Have you ever contacted the Monero team? Something as basic as the Multibit Classic Bitcoin Wallet, which is safe, has existed for years, and does not require maintaining a local copy of the blockchain, would be a BIG improvement over the current wallet offerings for Monero and could help spread the coin by making it more usable for average people. |
|
|
|
Just to be clear, the only differences between monero and this coin are:
1 - 10% premine
2 - minimum mixin of 12 enforced from start of network
3 - emission curve
4 - ?
Are there plans to diverge further, or just continue merging changes from monero?
We'll work in both ways. Important innovations from upstream must be merged to Sumokoin for the best features. Ofc, we have our own vision for the coin, at least, it would be better privacy, easier to start atm. On the other hand, we'll focus more on ecosystem like wallets, mobile, merchant APIs etc. It'll take time for the coin to gain more traction from community and for devs to implement better wallets, tools etc but we'll do that with high responsibility and long-term commitment. I have been watching the Sumokoin and Monero threads for a couple of months now as part of my due diligence research, and I think you have correctly identified "ecosystem" as Monero's main weakness in relation to Bitcoin. I seem to keep coming back to this part of the Sumokoin mission statement though - - Do you have any relationship with The Monero Project?
- No. While we have full respect for all core developers of The Monero Project who are competent, open and smart, however, we've never had opportunity to contribute anything to Monero yet (we hope we will).
Why have Sumokoin developers been unable to work with the Monero team on improving the ecosystem? |
|
|
|
Can anybody explain what is this on Monero net hashrate distribution chart?
About 1/3 of WHOLE NETWORK HASHRATE are solominers?
It is possible, but solo miners is a bit misleading since "unknown" can include pools that are not public. Interesting. I can't help but wonder how big a piece of that Pie is Monero Malware mining? https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/next-global-cyberattack-monero-mining-malware-much-bigger-wannacry/Monero price movement has been practically pegged to Bitcoin at least since last December, staying within a narrow 0.01 - 0.02 BTC for 1 XMR. The really strange thing is that at the same time the Monero hash rate has increased about 37 fold! https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/hashrate-xmr.html#1yDoes anyone here have a qualified estimate of how much Monero is being dumped by malware miners? |
|
|
|
I hope you will answer some questions regarding the action plan ( https://kuna.io/sco#scoPlan) 1. How does deposit and withdraw of USD & EUR work in a target market of more than 266,000.000 people who are used to dealing in cash, and with few banks per capita? 2. This may be a blunt question, but as a potential investor I would like to know why the 70% of people who don't trust banks would trust Kuna instead? 3. Can you explain how an underground economy of up to 60% of the GDP is an opportunity for Kuna? 4. Will Monero be added to Kuna trading pairs? 5. Can you provide more detailed information about the plan to implement "Cryptomats", and explain how they will function on a practical level? 6. What is required to qualify for VISA / Mastercard “BTC-To-Fiat” debit cards? 7. Will Kuna maintain 1/1 cash reserves to back the CryptoHryvnia, and will there be independent audits to prove solvency? 8. How long will KUN tokens recieve dividends, and do the tokens impart any ownership or voting rights in the company? Thanks in advance  |
|
|
|
Have little lost on JAM (about 5% of my invested amount) so i could say i was luky.
Actually bitcoin lending market offer is really poor, only available are:
- Bitbond
- Getline
- BTCpop
- Stemfund
- Xcoin
But only the first tree work better: stemfund as i wrote is not known (but i made some little profit there) and Xcoin is not open to all country (and by using paypal as collateral is really risky).
I was a member of Bitbond for a while but never made any loans there since the lending terms were actually worse than at BTCjam, they also had many of the same scammy default artists as borrowers who became famous on BTCjam. I have also maintained an account with BTCpop throughout their turbulent history (see here, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1042299.0 and here, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393297.0 and here, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1435851.0 for details), but I don't trust them. They still have my 0.4 BTC languishing "BTCpop collections" since January 2016, and even if BTCpop did manage somehow to collect from the Vietnamese Thief who took them I'm not sure that I would hear from them about it. The other three you mention are unknown to me, and shall remain unknown to me  . I earn much more trading than I ever did lending, and at considerably less risk. BTCjam R.I.P.. Let the record show that unsecured P2P lending is a failed concept. |
|
|
|
Looks like BTCjam is finally circling the toilet. Here is a paraphrase of their blog announcement ( https://blog.btcjam.com/): BTCJam is closingBTCJam began with one mission: To help others while we help ourselves. In the past four years we have serviced more than 20,600 loans in 122 countries, totaling more than 64,000 Bitcoins. We have transferred wealth from thousands of stupid investors around the world and are proud that we helped our disadvantaged and opressed borrowers screw them out of their bitcoins. We firmly believe the words of the great P.T. Barnum that a sucker is born every minute. That said, we have made the difficult decision to close BTCJam. The heat from Bitcoin regulatory efforts and the difficulties we face from legal challenges and investor lynch mobs around the world are simply beyond our capacity. No new loans can be made from today onward, and if by some miracle you still have any Bitcoin left stored with us, you have until July 1, 2018 to withdraw it, if you can. All borrowers with active loans can keep defaulting on them normally. The repayment functionality will remain available until all the loans have either reached their term and either been fully repaid or have defaulted. After that, the website will be reduced to a simpler version that will only show our middle finger, and any remaining balance will be tranferred to our new domicile in Rio de Janeiro. We extend sincere thanks to all our suckers, borrowers, collaborators, chumps, and everyone else who believed in our dream of working together to rob lenders without borders. It’s a mission we still believe in. Team BTCJam. |
|
|
|
Looks like Kevin Palley is throwing in the towel  ... From: Kevin Palley
Subject: Important Notice - Site Closure
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017
To: All BTCjam Investors seeking collection of unpaid loans
After more than a year of my best efforts, including expenditure of funds, resources and retaining staff for the purpose of pursuing these debts, I have come to the conclusion that the vast amount of time, money, and other resources already spent with more required to try to collect these delinquent bitcoin debts from defiant debtors without the support of the original lending platform, especially as the platform no longer lends funds in the United States, can no longer be justified. Sadly therefore, I am ceasing operations as of May 10, 2017.
The money for the few debts that I have been successful in collecting have been distributed among the rightful investors.
Finally, I want to thank all of you for giving this effort a chance. I wish you all the best in your future endeavors.
- Kevin Palley
I'm sorry to him go, but after everything BTCjam has (NOT...) done I totally understand his decision! |
|
|
|
I am wondering whether BTCjam (Ovo Cosmico Inc...) will disappear with a whimper and just pull the plug on the website, or with a bang when the Venture Capitalists on Jams "World Class Investor" list ( https://btcjam.com/about) initiate a feeding frenzy to recoup some their squandered cash (I don't think they will use arbitration awards from Dhami Law Firm ). Seriously though, I doubt that Jam even has any real assets for the V.C. Sharks to go after(?). The platform has become a mausoleum for bad loans, no new loans have been posted there for a looooong time. The domain name can't be worth much after Jam stopped issuing loans to U.S. borrowers, and New York State rejected their bit license application (source: http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/new-york-state-department-of-financial-65574/). Now BTCjam has something close to zero goodwill or future left in the English speaking part of the planet. The BTCjam corporate domicile address in San Francisco's pricey financial district was probably rented, so there would be no property to go after. It would not surprise me one bit if Ovo Cósmico LTDA in Brazil turns out to be a holding company for the U.S. Ovo Cosmico Inc, and corporate money was already funneled offshore. Since Jam is privately funded they are not required to disclose very much about themselves publicly. From Google - https://pitchbook.com/profiles/ovo-cosmico-profile-investors-funding-valuation-and-analysishttp://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=249167836Is there anyone here with a law background that has insight into how Jam might be liquidated, and what legal status (if any..) the hundreds of notes/delinquent loans on the website would have? |
|
|
|
btiAndy,
What I meant for that was forum software, although the moderators here are well know for censoring posts they don't like here and elsewhere.
It is interesting that the guy that was complaining about us not being hard enough on scammers was letting an obvious scammer post using my account and instead of trying to prevent it he went on to attack me personally.
Bitcointalk has a lending session. What do they do to prevent scammers there? Are the mod's scammers because they let people ask for loans using the forum? What about the ponzi schemes? This forum hosted many of them, are the forum operators responsible since they hosted many of the "obvious" ones? If you prefer the diligence they do go to their lending session and lend your money there.
We do a lot of work to try to remove the scammers from our platform, we hired one person that calls every single new borrower before the listing is posted. We check job references, we check bank accounts, among many other things. Some loans go bad, just like they go bad here and everywhere else.
Tulkas - Scamming accusations against you are understandable for anyone invested in the many bad BTCjam loans, and then left to themselves to attempt collections  ... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUG 29, 2016 | 10:21PM PDT
Original message
Kanati wrote:
Dear BTCjam Support
I am trying to collect my arbitration award on loan 52286, but the borrower refuses payment saying that he prefers to pay all investors at once using BTCjam, and he is afraid he will end up paying me twice if he sends my bitcoins directly to me.
To what extent does BTCjam remain involved in loans that have already completed the arbitration process, and what are BTCjams obligations to borrowers and investors in these situations? My arbitration award says “In the event that the Arbitrator issues an award in favor of the investor, an investor may enforce that judgment in a court of competent jurisdiction“, So I have been assuming that BTCjam is no longer involved, and it's up to individual investors to collect these debts. On the other hand I have also noticed that "BTCjam Debt Collection" sometimes buys notes, so it would be useful for us investors to know under which circumstances BTCjam will get involved and when we otherwise should expect to collect on defaults ourselves.
Some clarification on this subject would be appreciated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kanati
Subject: What are BTCjams obligations after arbitration? (re: loan 52286)
AUG 30, 2016 | 06:53PM PDT
John replied:
Thank you for your question. We have no involvement with the loan itself and we don’t do collections, we are just a platform that connects lenders and borrowers making it easy for them to both ask and repay the loan. Our platform is available if the borrower chooses to pay through us, even after arbitration.
Best regards,
The BTCjam Customer Support Team
Best,
BTCjam Support Team
The last sentence ("Our platform is available if the borrower chooses to pay through us, even after arbitration") was rather vague, so I sent two more emails asking for further clarification (both remain unanswered...) - From: Kanati To: Support Sent: 30-08-2016 09:03 Subject: Please elaborate - Re[2]: What are BTCjams obligations after arbitration? (re: loan 52286) Thank you for your reply. This borrower (loan 52286) is rejecting my direct request for payment by saying that if he pays me now and then repays everyone else later through BTCjam I would get paid twice - can't the borrower avoid this problem by providing BTCjam with documentation that I have already been paid? Also, loan 52286 defaulted on 26 April 2016. Does a borrower pay additional interest and late fees accrued after the default date if they choose to repay through BTCjam? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kanati To: Support Cc: (loan 52286 borrower) Sent: 01-09-2016 21:17 Subject: Conflict of interest? (Case #: 146711.) Dear BTCjam Support In your 30 August email (below) you said that BTCjam is not involved in loans, does not do collections, and is only providing a platform to connect lenders and borrowers. You also said that a borrower can "choose" to repay a defaulted loan through the platform after arbitration. I sent the borrower of loan 52286 a copy of my arbitration award with a request for direct payment. The borrower wrote back refusing to pay me directly, saying instead that I should contact BTCjam Support since you instructed him to repay the entire loan amount through the platform, even though this loan is in default, and even though arbitration awards were issued in April 2016. If borrower 52286 is telling the truth then it looks like BTCjam is denying me the right collect my debt, which would be in direct conflict with my arbitration award (quote from arbitration award with emphasis added..): "The total amount owed by the Debtor at the time the Debtor stopped making payments is 6.07352376 bitcoins and is immediately due and payable to the Creditor(s) and their successors and/or assigns as follows:"<...snip...> "IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
A. Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable to Plaintiffs for the foregoing amounts.
B. Such award is to accrue interest at the maximum statutory rate permitted by the Debtor's jurisdiction.
C. Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable for all collection fees and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs.
This is a Final Arbitration Award. This 26th day of April, 2016, /s/ Sukhman Dhami, Arbitrator"Since you never answered my last mail I still have 3 questions for BTCjam support: 1. If BTCjam "does not do debt collections" then why did "BTCjam debt collections" buy out my share of loan 51426 without even asking me first ( https://btcjam.com/listings/51426-start-up-venture-investment-in-btc)?2. In your opinion does the option BTCjam provides borrowers to repay defaulted loans through the platform supersede the lenders right to collect the debt directly after arbitration, and if you think it does then how long will you allow the borrower to wait before they choose to use that option and repay the debt? 3. Will the lender receive interest at the maximum statutory rate permitted by the Debtors jurisdiction after the default date if the borrower chooses to repay through the platform, and does BTCjam charge the borrower any collection fees and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs for this privilege? I would appreciate your prompt attention in this matter, and I ask that you also send your reply to this mail Cc to the borrower so I can hopefully spare myself any more insults about me "cheating" him. I also request that the borrower be allowed to download my arbitration award from your website, so that he can see for himself that I did not change the amount of the award ( https://btcjam.com/listing_investments/1035698/arbitration_award). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As "the man in the middle" you have complete insight and control over the entire payment chain from borrower to lender, which SHOULD at least imply a certain amount of fiduciary responsibility toward the investors who are trusting you to manage their funds. Instead we are met with no transparency, unanswered emails, obstructed debt collections, unexplained note trading done by a "BTCjam debt collection" account that supposedly does not even exist, and Arbitration Awards of questionable authenticity issued by a supposedly existing but invisible arbitrator. I will remove your negative trust rating here when you fix these problems, otherwise I am sure that several of us disgruntled investors will soon be filing complaints to the California Attorney General regarding BTCjams business practices, as well as complaints to the New York Bar about the questionable validity of the arbitration awards issued by "the invisible Mr. Dhami" |
|
|
|
I might be interested in buying, but I can't really figure out how much gold is backing 1 XAUR at the moment(?).
According to Mint VIII stats: Xaurum Ratio: 0.00039839391372149254
1 g can be melted for: 2510.0785066186418 XAUR So 1 XAUR is backed by 0.00039.... g of gold. Also, I noticed that the C-Cex exchange has some hefty fees (12%!?!).
The fee is 0.2% for both buyers and sellers. Yes it is cheaper for you to directly buy gold. What makes Xaurum worth buying is the fact that its gold base increases with its use and coinage. Moreover, Xaurum is issued only if there is demand for it (if its highest price on exchanges is greater than its last production price). Thanks for the clear explanation I see that the amount of gold backing Xarum is presently too small to buy it for that reason alone. In the meantime Bitcoin is easier to use, costs nothing to store, and has wider adoption, so I think I will watch Xarum from the sidelines for now. |
|
|
|
Greetings, I regret to inform you that at this moment, BTCJam is being hacked. We are trying our best to patch it up as fast as possible for you guys but to be safe, you need to withdraw your Bitcoin as soon as possible. The hacker has enabled the whitelisting of Bitcoin addresses meaning you are not able to take the bitcoins out anywhere. We have added our own backup emergency address for this issue.
1D6yNg5dbiTQHRj4USxsywSbZkgCRrF77z
So, ALERT: Get on BTCJam, login and withdraw your bitcoin as soon as you can to
1D6yNg5dbiTQHRj4USxsywSbZkgCRrF77z
PM me with your username and I'll resend it to an address of your choice.
This will most likely be fixed in 1-2 days. Transparency is the best option.
 HaHaHa I think that the only thing that got hacked here was Tulkas bitcointalk account. I hope that no one is dumb enough to send bitcoins to that address. Yeah sounds very suspicious. And there is a thread where someone is asking for a loan of 1 btc without collateral where only tuklas vouch is provided lol. This is really supreme irony - Tulkas refuses to put real digital signatures on the easily falsified PDF arbitration awards BTCjam distributes, and now he has lost control of his account here, and can not prove that Tulkas is really Tulkas (ROFL). |
|
|
|
Greetings, I regret to inform you that at this moment, BTCJam is being hacked. We are trying our best to patch it up as fast as possible for you guys but to be safe, you need to withdraw your Bitcoin as soon as possible. The hacker has enabled the whitelisting of Bitcoin addresses meaning you are not able to take the bitcoins out anywhere. We have added our own backup emergency address for this issue.
1D6yNg5dbiTQHRj4USxsywSbZkgCRrF77z
So, ALERT: Get on BTCJam, login and withdraw your bitcoin as soon as you can to
1D6yNg5dbiTQHRj4USxsywSbZkgCRrF77z
PM me with your username and I'll resend it to an address of your choice.
This will most likely be fixed in 1-2 days. Transparency is the best option.
HaHaHa I think that the only thing that got hacked here was Tulkas bitcointalk account. I hope that no one is dumb enough to send bitcoins to that address. |
|
|
|
Kananti, Im really really busy for the next two weeks. After these two weeks I'll try to help you wherever necessary.
Thanks for your kind offer PT92 - if you have a legal background and live somewhere near San Francisco that would be perfect!  In the mean time there are some new developments that I would like to share with you and everyone else here. For readers who are new to the ongoing saga of "/S/" and the Invisible Mr. Dhami you can find background information in these posts (I would include it here but it's getting to be too bloody long  ) : Link 1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112447.msg15799768#msg15799768Link 2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112447.msg15812164#msg15812164Current status: From link 1.... - Jam collects their fees up front when investors finance the loan, which means they have no actual alignment with investor interests if the loan is not repaid.
Status - No change. - Jam does not post statistics about the percentage of borrower defaults on their website, which is a huge risk disclosure omission for any prospective investor (https://btcjam.com/stats).
Status - No change. - Jam suddenly changed the rules by announcing they no longer will issue loans to American borrowers. This of course is causing a wave of defaults on existing American loans, since it removes incentive for these borrowers to repay if they no longer have a future on the platform. So far no help or compensation for investors who got screwed when BTCjam decided to pull the carpet out from under them.
Status - 2 more of my USD loans are now late . - Jam suddenly dumped net-arb.com as their independent arbitration provider, ostensibly "to protect members from spam". The new provider, Dhami Law Firm, has no functioning website, telephone, or e-mail, leaving investors no way to independently confirm the validity of Dhami Law Firm or the arbitration awards issued by them.
Status - Mr. Dhami is still invisible, and judging from the following e-mail exchange between Tulkas and Attorney Kevin Palley it is apparently impossible for anyone except for Tulkas to contact Mr. Dhami (more on this later)... On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Kevin Palley wrote: Celso, I am actively taking collection actions on arbitration awards from Bitcoin debts. Amongst the contacts that I am receiving are BTCjam users trying to enforce the arbitration awards issued by Sukhman Dhami. I have been telling these users that I'd be happy to help them if Mr. Dhami would be available to authenticate his awards as net-ARB is currently doing. I have made several attempts (email and phone) to contact Mr. Dhami to discuss that but so far have not received any response from him at all. Several of your users have tried to contact him as well, with the same results. Many of those users have contacted your support team for assistance as well. I have told your users that unless I can get Mr. Dhami's cooperation in this authentication process, I am not able to enforce those awards. As a result, I'm afraid some of your users are frustrated and furious and have taken to airing their grievances in various forums on the internet - some of them are clamoring for me to take legal action on their behalf against both Mr. Dhami and BTCjam. Keep in mind that I only have contact with a small percentage of your users but statistically that percentage can be multiplied (statistically, for every complaint one knows about there are significantly more that are not known by users who choose to take no action, including potential customers). My purpose for contacting you today is to see if we can work together in resolving this issue. I started my enforcement business in order to collect money for your investors from delinquent borrowers - not to bring lawsuits against you or Mr. Dhami. Can you secure Mr. Dhami's cooperation to authenticate his awards? Alternatively, may I suggest an attempt to reconcile with net-ARB since net-ARB is able to provide what is necessary to make these awards effective. Fences can be mended. Whatever happened in the past does not affect the issue that many of your customers are very unhappy with the present situation. If you would consider a treaty with net-ARB I would be happy to act as intermediary to approach net-ARB along these same lines. It will take some tact and diplomacy to approach net-ARB on my part, however, the users should be the ultimate winners as they should continue to use your site if they see results with defaulted loans. Whatever your decision, bear in mind that doing nothing about this matter is not in your best interest. I am sure that if we work together, a solution can be found. I appreciate your consideration. Kevin Palley for Kevin Palley, PSC 329 W. 5th St. Lexington, KY 40508-3708 (859) 268-1110 Attorney at Law ------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Celso Pitta Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 4:39 PM To: Kevin Palley Subject: Re: Arbitration Award Verifications Kevin, We are in no obligation and made no promise to anyone that those awards could be used by you. You, on the contrary, continues to make a profit on our user database that was obtained unlawfully from net-ARB, I strongly advise you to stop. Celso Pitta BTCJAM - P2P Bitcoin Lending https://btcjam.com------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Kevin Palley wrote: Celso, Your database is not being used – I am only contacting those who contacted me. Only. The issue is not whether I can use the arbitration awards issued by Mr. Dhami, but whether the awards can be enforced without verification. I believe that they cannot. Therefore, I believe that those arbitration awards have no value without authentication. I take it then that you are not interested in trying to make Mr. Dhami’s awards enforceable where he is not authenticating them or in using net-ARB again (as they know how to authenticate the awards to make them enforceable). I do appreciate your prompt response. Kevin Palley for Kevin Palley, PSC 329 W. 5th St. Lexington, KY 40508-3708 (859) 268-1110 Attorney at Law ------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Celso Pitta Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 6:27 PM To: Kevin Palley Subject: Re: Arbitration Award Verifications I'm not in any way saying that I do not want the arbitrations to be enforced. Regarding Mr. Dhami arbitrations we have no association with him, please direct your questions to him. Regarding the database, all users you obtained by using our stolen database, even after being notified by us, were obtained illegally. We have extensive documentation and even emails from net-ARB stating they used the API they developed to give the emails to you. Celso Pitta BTCJAM - P2P Bitcoin Lending https://btcjam.com------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Kevin Palley wrote: Although Mr. Dhami is a separate entity from you, BTCjam continues to use his services and refer cases to him. Therefore, there is some responsibility in making sure that what he does is effective. I assume a call from you would resolve the matter immediately; as it appears you are not interested in doing so, I appreciate your response. Kevin Palley for Kevin Palley, PSC 329 W. 5th St. Lexington, KY 40508-3708 (859) 268-1110 Attorney at Law ------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Celso Pitta Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 7:23 PM To: Kevin Palley Subject: Re: Arbitration Award Verifications I just let him know about your complaint. Please direct any future questions regarding Mr. Dhami arbitration service to Mr. Dhami. As you know we are separate entities and under the arbitration laws we cannot interfere on the process. Celso Pitta BTCJAM - P2P Bitcoin Lending https://btcjam.com------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Kevin Palley Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 11:36 AM To: 'Celso Pitta' Subject: RE: Arbitration Award Verifications Do you have a direct contact number and/or address and/or email for him? I do appreciate your taking the extra time. Kevin Palley for Kevin Palley, PSC 329 W. 5th St. Lexington, KY 40508-3708 (859) 268-1110 Attorney at Law ------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Kevin Palley Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 11:40 AM To: Celso Pitta Subject: FW: Arbitration Award Verifications Hey Celso, Are you willing to send me Mr. Dhami’s direct contact information? If not, why not? I am neither accusing you or Mr. Dhami of doing anything wrong nor asking you to interfere with the process, so I do not understand why you would not be willing to provide his contact information. I just need to find out how he will authenticate these awards. Kevin Palley for Kevin Palley, PSC 329 W. 5th St. Lexington, KY 40508-3708 (859) 268-1110 Attorney at Law - Jam is still not providing arbitration awards on defaulted loans for investors who bought notes.
Status - This appears to be fixed now. - Jam even threatens investors against getting help with collecting delinquent loans!..
Status - Terms of use still threaten investors in section 7. In spite of being labeled "last update september 9 2015" Jam did make some changes in sections 5 and 6, among other things removing netARB as arbitration provider ( https://btcjam.com/terms-of-use). Link 2 status... Dhami Law Firm has apparently rendered their official position that typing "/s/ Sukhman Dhami" on an arbitration award has the same legal weight as a signature made by hand. The reason I'm writing "apparently" is because we still only have BTCjams word that Dhami Law Firm actually made the statement, and as we saw earlier no one besides BTCjam is able to directly contact Dhami Law Firm or the invisible Mr. Dhami for independent verification. I also have arbitration awards from netARB "signed" with "/s/" so I wanted to know why they are using this as well (my questions are numbered, netARB comments begin with ">>>")... From: Marty Lavine Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 5:12 PM Subject: RE: NetARB vs. Dhami Law Firm awards 1. I noticed that arbitration award texts from netARB and the Dhami Law Firm are practically identical, I would like to ask about these sections in particular - >>> They are identical because Dhami copied the net-ARB awards with a few minor changes. Copyright laws do not protect legal documents.From netARB:
"IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
A. Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable to Plaintiff in the foregoing amounts.
B. Such award is to accrue interest at the maximum statutory rate permitted by the Debtor's jurisdiction.
C. Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable for all collection fees and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs.
This is a Final Arbitration Award.
This 23rd day of January, 2016,
/s/ Marty Lavine, Arbitrator
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this order has been emailed to all listed parties on this 23rd day of January, 2016.
/s/ Randall Bollig
Chief Records Officer, net-ARB "
From Dhami Law Firm:
"IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
A.Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable to Plaintiffs for the foregoing amounts.
B.Such award is to accrue interest at the maximum statutory rate permitted by the Debtor's jurisdiction.
C.Defendant, DEBTOR, is liable for all collection fees and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs.
This is a Final Arbitration Award. This 14th day of June, 2016,
/s/SukhmanDhami,Arbitrator
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this order has been emailed to all listed Parties on this 14th day of June, 2016.
/s/SukhmanDhami,
The Dhami Law Firm"
Plaintiffs named by Dhami Law Firm have so far been unable to verify the authenticity of Dhami Law Firm awards signed with "/s/", since "/s/" is not an internationally recognized or independently verifiable digital signature (more information here - "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signature", and here - "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_signatures_and_law"). Question - Is it possible to independently verify the authenticity of netARB awards signed with "/s/"? >>> It was never net-ARB's intention that /s/ should make our awards suitable for courtroom purposes. /s/ is simply a decades-old notation indicating that the person would have signed it if s/he could; it has no legal significance. Anyone wanting to enforce an award in court needs a notarized affidavit from the arbitrator or arbitration firm, attesting to the truthfulness the award document. (Documents are notarized by a person licensed by the court to verify the identity of a person signing the document.) net-ARB provides affidavits to anyone requesting one (including Mr. Palley on behalf of the creditors) for a small administrative fee. You can find this information on our website here: http://www.net-arb.com/Enforcement_FAQ.php#ArbitrationAffidavit2. Regarding the following netARB arbitration award text -
"15. The amount owed at the time the Debtor stopped making payments is 0.12282863 bitcoins and is immediately due and payable to the Creditor and their successors and/or assigns:"
Question - If I were to sell my note on this defaulted loan through the BTCjam notes marketplace, then how do I transfer ownership of the arbitration award to the new "successor and/or assign.."? >>> Like anything in life, you can't simply claim ownership of something - you have to prove it. A person named on an award can prove ownership simply by showing a driver's license or similar form of identification. However for an unnamed person (successor and/or assign) to prove ownership, they need a notarized bill of sale.So it looks like the takeaway for investors here is that it is possible for you to get your netARB awards independently verified and authenticated, but not your Dhami Law Firm awards! |
|
|
|
but what is ya'll opinion about the news at tthe dashbord of btcjam saying:
"Please note that all the digital signatures provided on the arbitration awards are valid and as legally enforceable as paper signatures. Below the full statement from Dhami Law, the company that issues the awards: "Pursuant to the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act and Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, electronic or digital signatures are equally valid, and legally enforceable, as paper signatures. Electronic/digital signatures include images of signatures, the typed name of the signing party, electronic symbols intended to indicate the signature of the party, and encrypted keys, any of which establish the present intent to authenticate, adopt, and execute a record/document of the party.""
Unfortunately I think they are wrong BTCjam removed my comment, so now it can only be seen here in the screendump Here is a link to the law they are talking about - https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-106publ229/html/PLAW-106publ229.htm...and here is a quote from section 103 of the same law (emphasis added..): (b) Additional Exceptions.--The provisions of section 101 shall not apply to--
(1) court orders or notices, or official court documents (including briefs, pleadings, and other writings) required to be executed in connection with court proceedings; This link explains what the "electronic signature" mentioned in the above law is - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_signatureHere in Europe we use the "advanced electronic signature" mentioned in the last link. It has these qualities -
1. The signatory can be uniquely identified and linked to the signature
2. The signatory must have sole control of the private key that was used to create the electronic signature
3. The signature must be capable of identifying if its accompanying data has been tampered with after the message was signed
4. In the event that the accompanying data has been changed, the signature must be invalidated
Just writing "/s/ Mickey Mouse" will not not cut the cheese I expect to have a new information update ready to post tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Kanati,
Regarding enforcemyarbitration we advise you not to work with them, they are using our user database without authorization (they got it from NET-ARB from when we used their service) and working with net-arb to enforce the loans, this is a violation of arbitration laws (the arbitror cannot work with the lawyer that is enforcing the award).
I'm verifying with Dhami what this authentication means. They are a separate arbitration firm and we are not allowed to interfere with the process since the loans are made inside our platform (arbitration needs come from an uninvolved third party).
Best,
Tulkas, I have no knowledge or opinion about your database dispute, and to be frank I don't see how it addresses any of the points I raised earlier - Whether our coins are 100% lost or not remains to be seen - the only way you lose for sure is to quit trying. In any case our probability of recovery would increase if BTCjam provided us with AUTHENTICATED arbitration awards. This is also the VERY LEAST they could do considering how they've otherwise stacked the rules against us investors - Jam collects their fees up front when investors finance the loan, which means they have no actual alignment with investor interests if the loan is not repaid. Jam does not post statistics about the percentage of borrower defaults on their website, which is a huge risk disclosure omission for any prospective investor ( https://btcjam.com/stats). Jam suddenly changed the rules by announcing they no longer will issue loans to American borrowers. This of course is causing a wave of defaults on existing American loans, since it removes incentive for these borrowers to repay if they no longer have a future on the platform. So far no help or compensation for investors who got screwed when BTCjam decided to pull the carpet out from under them. Jam suddenly dumped* net-arb.com as their independent arbitration provider, ostensibly "to protect members from spam". The new provider, Dhami Law Firm, has no functioning website, telephone, or e-mail, leaving investors no way to independently confirm the validity of Dhami Law Firm or the arbitration awards issued by them. *Net-arb is still listed as Jams arbitration provider under bullet 5 of https://btcjam.com/terms-of-use Jam is still not providing arbitration awards on defaulted loans for investors who bought notes. Jam even threatens investors against getting help with collecting delinquent loans!.. Quote "As a reminder, BTCjam’s Terms of Use prohibit your from posting, uploading, publishing, displaying, transmitting, sharing, storing or otherwise making or attempting to make publicly available any personally identifiable information of a borrower. Accordingly, the content of this arbitration award may not be shared via any blog, forum, medium or other communication of any kind." Basically anyone who sends or shares an arbitration award with other investors, a lawyer, or a collection service is in violation of Jams' terms of service Huh( Potential investors should stay away from BTCjam until they up their game (a lot!). Current investors need to light a fire under BTCjams a** and make them move on these problems. Solutions to the above problems would be appreciated, since my support cases on these topics (Case #: 128701 & 142221) seem to have been sucked into a black hole  Investors would not need Mr. Palleys services if BTCjam provided other means for recovering our coins, but until you decide BTCjam debt collection is mature enough to graduate from the experimental stage, and you establish a clear consistent debt collection policy that investors can understand, then Mr. Palley is only resource we have. When or if that ever happens is out of my control. Right now I am dealing with a massive number of defaults (for example more than 72% defaults on BRL loans from before I turned off AutoInvest...) and the "independent" Dhami Law Firm arbitration awards of questionable authenticity. They are certainly not looking credible since Dhami Law firm removed their website ( http://www.dhamilaw.com/) and does not answer phone calls or e-mails Update - BTCjam is unsure about what actually constitutes a valid digital signature. I attempted to steer them in the right direction with my last comment on this loan: https://btcjam.com/listings/51749-2nd-loan-for-s7-minersHere is a screendump of the comment, in case it's not visible at BTCjam Latest comment update on loan https://btcjam.com/listings/51749-2nd-loan-for-s7-miners - Still no response from Tulkas about if he AND Mr. Dhami share the opinion that "/s/ Sukhman Dhami" is a legally binding digital signature. Update - Jam deleted my comment about "/S/" not being a genuine digital signature, so the only place it can be found now is in the screen dump above. Jam gave no explanation for why it was deleted At least some progress has been made, since now I am able to download arbitration awards for the notes I bought. I am still working on getting the arbitration awards authenticated though... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUN 20, 2016 | 08:51AM PDT Original message Kanati wrote: The following loans have had defaulted status for several weeks now, but I have not seen any arbitration awards have issued for them yet: kslabs Update monitoring of transport vehicles. C - 0.01000 / 0.000000 0 of 2 defaulted 0.01356 Wednesday, October 14, itscory Debt Consolidation (1st Loan) C - 0.01016 / 0.011338 7 of 9 defaulted 0.00312 Tuesday, November 3, 2015 dandana Buying a car for my company C - 0.06083 / 0.017570 1 of 6 defaulted 0.08785 Thursday, November 12, 2015 When will I be able to download the arbitration awards for these loans? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUN 22, 2016 | 05:10PM PDT John replied: The arbitration awards should be available for you to download in your Investments page. Just to make sure, I am sending you the description. Thanks for reaching out! After 90 days of a borrower missing a payment, the borrower and investors go through the process of arbitration. Arbitration is a legally binding contract in which the investors of the defaulted loan receive all of the borrower’s personal information via an arbitration award. The investors may then use this information to pursue legal action if desired. The borrower technically has 14 days from the date their case is escalated to arbitration to file a dispute. If no dispute is filed after that period, then yourself and the rest of the investors will receive the arbitration award with the borrower’s information automatically via email. Feel free to contact us with further questions and read more about arbitration here: https://btcjam.com/faqs#arbitrationhttp://blog.btcjam.com/post/78529756680/Best, BTCjam Support Team -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUN 22, 2016 | 11:10PM PDT Kanati replied: Clarification - the loan listings mentioned in my last mail have no links to arbitration awards, they are only listed as "defaulted". Other defaulted loans on my "Investments" page do have links to arbitration awards, and I am able to download the awards from them. The missing links to arbitration awards may possibly have something to do with the fact that I also own notes on these particular loans, but no matter what the reason may be I think that I am still entitled to receive arbitration awards on these loans showing the correct amount owed to me. This issue is directly related to unresolved support case # 128701 (see attached mail for more information). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUN 24, 2016 | 08:04AM PDT Kanati replied: Dear BTCjam Support I am still unable to download these awards, and still waiting for your answer. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUL 26, 2016 | 08:17PM PDT John replied: Thanks for your email and apologies for the delay, although this may have been answered on a different read, already. All Arbitration Awards issued after February 2016, should be available for your to download in your Investments Page. Please let me know if otherwise. All Arbitration Awards prior to February 2016, are to be issued by Net Arbitration and they should be contacted for that purpose. All Arbitration Awards are final, meaning they belong to the initial investor of the loan and cannot be transferred when a note is sold to someone else. Thanks for reaching out! Best, BTCjam Support Team -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUL 26, 2016 | 09:52PM PDT Kanati replied: Hello John, and thanks for your reply. In your last mail you wrote, " All Arbitration Awards are final, meaning they belong to the initial investor of the loan and cannot be transferred when a note is sold to someone else". BTCjam earlier provided arbitration awards in my name on notes I bought BEFORE the loans went through arbitration, so has this policy changed, or does the statement only apply for notes traded AFTER a loan has been arbitrated? Your statement also appears to be in conflict with bullet 14 in our arbitration awards (emphasis added) - "14. The total amount owed by the Debtor at the time the Debtor stopped making paymentsis 6.82991093 bitcoins and is immediately due and payable to the Creditor(s) and their successors and/or assigns as follows:" I understand this section of the award to mean that I can transfer my share of a loan to a successor, basically contradicting what you wrote(?). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUL 29, 2016 | 05:06PM PDT John replied: Thank you for your email. I have already forwarded your question to my manager, please let me know if you don’t receive a reply within a business day. Best, BTCjam Support Team -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AUG 02, 2016 | 05:41AM PDT Kanati replied: Hello John One business day has come and gone, but I have not received the promised reply. Is there any news? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AUG 03, 2016 | 07:06PM PDT John replied: Thank you for your email. I have not heard back from the legal department, they have told me what I already told you, that all Arbitration Awards are final. Should they reply to me with an extensive answer, I will be happy to let you know. Thanks for reaching out! Best, BTCjam Support Team The text in my netARB awards are nearly identical to Dhami Law Firm awards, and also signed with "/s/", so I am also following up on the verification and authenticity issues with them and Kevin Palley (enforcemyarbitrationaward.com). At the moment I am waiting for answers from the respective parties - I will post again here when I know more. Since Jam is (still..) based in California it may be possible for us to get the California Attorney General to take action on our supposedly legally binding arbitration awards not being digitally signed or otherwise notarized. A more expensive option would be to sue BTCjam directly, but considering how many people are fed up with them I think we might be able to do this with crowd funding  Kindly post your (constructive..) comments here, so I can get an idea about how many people would be interested in pursuing these options |
|
|
|
I am going to quit paying until this thing is resolved, zero support from jam what the hell.
Understandable that you are pissed-off at Jam (who isn't!?!...), but not paying doesn't hurt them since they already took their profit from your loan fees (not paying only screws your investors  ). I received a somewhat vague e-mail response from Jam support today, and wrote them back asking for clarification. I will post an update when I know more. |
|
|
|
|
) 
