News: A group of female engineers are working on a new CPU. Based on female logic, it uses four different boolean values: 0-Neither YES nor NO: 1-Either YES or NO: 2-NO three times: 3-NO and never mention this to me again ever  Who are you and why are you posting this crap on this thread? I'm a miner and this is just a joke. Please do not bother!  I understand that it's a joke, but it is not funny, and as this is the first time you have participated in this thread, I was wondering why you are posting that here of all places? I'm sure there is a sub-forum on here for posting stuff like that, this just seems a very odd choice of places to start randomly spamming poor jokes... |
|
|
|
News: A group of female engineers are working on a new CPU. Based on female logic, it uses four different boolean values: 0-Neither YES nor NO: 1-Either YES or NO: 2-NO three times: 3-NO and never mention this to me again ever Who are you and why are you posting this crap on this thread? |
|
|
|
On a more serious note this situation is a false dichotomy.
Zach is creating the illusion that there are only 2 options for bondholders to chose between. He has named his recent contract change to capped bonds "the original contract" and is claiming that we must chose between the new contract where we have zero guarantees of any sort and the "original" contract which is NOT the original contract.
The refusal to justify any of his scammy behavior by claiming he does not provide legal advice is just comical.
As is already evident by his previous lack of accountability with the 2 week mining for hardware period being extended to pretty much whatever he pleased despite what was agreed upon, unnecessary complete lack of communication, affiliation with BFL, false claims of moving the asset to an exchange, not posting the new contract until the AMA had already started, complete lack of transparency and refusal to answer any meaningful questions it's becoming obvious to almost all of us that Zach cannot be trusted.
As time is progressing Zach is somehow finding him self in control of more and more of our money and we bondholders are finding ourselves in control of less and less of our original investment.
Do we really want to hand over absolute power to this thus far very flaky unreliable person with the knowledge that accepting this false dichotomy may very well be the last we ever see of our money and the beginning of a new very wealthy life for the person that has been deceiving us?
As more and more people are realising and pointing out, this is the pertinent point here. Some have called it the "bait and switch", but I think that the phrase "false dichotomy" describes it very accurately. This new contract is being offered to obscure the previous unilateral change to fixed rate contracts which broke the spirit of the original agreement. The fact that bonds were going to be proportional was represented until very recently, and saying that the original contract never guaranteed that is disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst. On top of everything else, ask yourself this: if the contracts were always going to be fixed to 100MH/s (or 300MH/s) , why would he expect that anyone would consent to hold back mined coins for reinvestment if rates are fixed? Clearly this is money comes out of investors' pockets, and a fixed rate contract guarantees that it will never be recouped, by definition. At the time, a poll was taken and a >50% majority decision was reached where this was considered a good idea for everyone, but not a single one of those people would have thought that to be a good idea if bondholders were not going to profit from that reinvestment. This is just one of numerous examples showing that Zach, many months after the "IPO", knew what the spirit of the original agreement was and was intending to keep to that. Then suddenly something changed, and now we are being offered a "choice" to mask the fact that this was ever the case, along with the option to waive any rights we had under the actual original agreement. It has been a long wait but the cards are finally down, all that remains to be seen is how the dust settles. |
|
|
|
Would you submit LRM financials to a third party audit paid for by contract holders?
There are no contractual obligations to do so, but if in the future we deem it necessary we will consider it. I DO have a CPA overseeing my books, including BTC wallets. I understand you have closed the AMA. There is a glaring outstanding question raised by this particular answer. The new contract specifies a discretionary (read optional) bonus payout per contract, however, that bonus payout will be completely on the honor system without any third party audits. As was stated earlier even if there were an audit said funds could be diverted to new shares, LR's pocket etc. on a whim. An additional question is: How has any of this restored faith in LRM or it's contracts? The price per contract has tanked and unless bonus payouts are both plentiful and consistent I see little hope in recovering more than a fraction of initial contract costs. Additionally anybody buying existing or new contracts would be foolish to value them as worth anything more than the 100 MH/s since the bonus is completely discretionary and can become zero at any time. That is all correct, plus we don't know how much hardware is incoming, even in the current BitFury shipment, as the AMA was closed just before my question re-asking this. It is, however, almost a moot point, as neither contract entitles bondholders to any of the proceeds from that equipment. Many questions remain to be answered... |
|
|
|
Q2) Given that we have just received the contract, I would really like to digest it for 24 hours as I may come up with follow up questions. Would you consider scheduling another Q&A session with lawyer present later next week?
Q2: There will be time allotted for all contract holders to decide what they chose to do. I believe this time will be 60 days from today. . Appear to have missed that, apologies. This has not been planned or scheduled, but we will discuss it internally and advise. Just out of curiosity, who is this "we" you are now referring to? Also, before, when you answered about the incoming hardware, the original question was clearly asking in terms of TH/s not a percentage, so could you tell us that please? Also, if the hashrate is updated automatically, but 40-50% is already online, why are we not seeing this already? |
|
|
|
Regarding the contract, please state what is the case if we do not agree with the terms given.
Since LRM already took our BTC, it seems we are forced to accept. The 'All purchases are final' bit. Well, I didn't know I was 'purchasing' a crappy amount of hashing power for 4BTC I am not sure how people can legally be forced into accepting these 'new terms and conditions'. I, for one, want my BTC back. I don't care that the dollar amount has changed. 1 BTC then is 1 BTC now. To avoid spamming the thread and also defeating the purpose of the ama, please don't answer questions for him. You saying that all purchases are final is meaningless, as this is a change of the terms, and this cannot be done without agreement. It is of critical importance for him to state what happens if people reject the new terms. |
|
|
|
|
Regarding the contract, please state what is the case if we do not agree with the terms given.
|
|
|
|
The contract is complete and I have the go ahead to release the doc, but there is one question still un-answered to my lawyer that I'm waiting on before finishing the announcement that will go out with it giving a brief overview.
If you have been given the go ahead as you stated then post the contract. People need time to read it before they know what questions they want to ask you. Please fire your lawyer as soon as this is over, he is embarrassing you. +1 Come on guys, be fair, I think it's a pretty solid team effort here...  |
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
Sorry for wasting everyone's time, I didn't realise just how cheap hardware is apparently selling for on here, and thought the prices would be closer to, though not the same as, on eBay.
If people want the Chilis then I will sell in batches of greater than or equal to 10 for 0.2BTC each, with some PSUs thrown in. I imagine I won't get any interest at this price, but that is what they are worth to me - the heatsinks and fans are worth $30 each alone. Otherwise I will just mine them till they are worthless and then eBay the spare parts and PSUs.
Again, sorry for wasting people's time,
Merlin
|
|
|
|
ebay prices for the bfl machine are insane, dont know whats wrong in ebay. working on current ghs per btc would be more realistic.
Sure - start chucking some numbers around and we can work from there then. |
|
|
|
What kind of ballpark were you thinking about as far as the chili farm price. I would throw out a number myself but I tend start pretty low (so I'm told) so I thought I would try another approach.
I have several of these things myself so I'm very familiar with them.
I would say something roughly commensurate with the going ebay price for BFL hardware as a starting point. Try chucking a number out and we can work from there. Don't forget that there is a reasonable amount of added value in the 6 large PSUs and laptops etc. Where abouts are you btw? And what would your preferred currency be? |
|
|
|
|
Bump.
Obviously it goes without saying this is all ready to ship instantly.
|
|
|
|
I have 6x 60GH/s BFL Singles for sale, and 31x MrTeal 32GH/s Miners for sale. The BFL hardware is pretty self-explanatory so I won't bother with a description. Regarding the MrTeal "Chili" miners, these use the BFL chips and were made by MrTeal & ChipGeek ( see construction/design thread here). The MrTeal miners will come with PSUs (6x EVGA Supernova 1500W PSUs) and two cheap host laptops and all the cables & USB hubs. Also included are mounted heatsinks and fans (31x Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO), thermal pads etc. Essentially it is a full rig which works out of the box. Please post any questions you may have, and PM/post with offers. Shipping within the US is simple, but I will consider shipping outside if someone is buying all/a large quantity. Priority will be given to those buying whole batches, i.e. all the BFL units or all the MrTeal units. These ship from separate locations, and shipping will therefore be separate on these orders even if one person buys them all. Will sell for BTC/USD/GBP.  .    |
|
|
|
No positive change in divs so... no new hardware?
Sadly that logic no longer follows...  Hopefully it will again though... |
|
|
|
If labrat already has the new hardware, we likely won't be seeing any dividend changes yet. I doubt labrat will give an update on the hardware until after the contract issue is resolved. If he publicly announces that the new hardware is mining and people aren't getting paid for it yet, all the pitchforks are going to come out, yet again. There's no reason to stir the pot in this manner when it is known we can't receive the dividends yet. So my guess is the announcement will come with the announcement of the new contract, and it will contain all the relevant information for a large back-pay of the backlogged dividends we are due.
There are good reasons to believe this to be the case - just thought I'd share a little light in the darkness. |
|
|
|
I don't think anyone here should lawyer up, report anything or do anything legally until something at least happens that actually defrauds you. Since the new hardware has not gone online yet, the most that has happened is everyone has gained an increase in hashing power from I believe 280mh to 300mh.
It's primarily about next steps beyond that, which we're all waiting to hear about. In the short term, everyone needs to chill out and wait to hear what is going to happen.
This is a valid and important point. As of yet, nothing has actually happened apart from some news worrying (and riling) people. Since consensus is that nobody cares what happens with respect to the bond/contract terminology or splits etc, (so long as the spirit of the original agreement is honoured), it is all about how future hardware deployment is passed on to current bondholders. That is the issue at hand. Until action is taken in this regard, as opposed to words, people have no cause for grievance. Annoyance yes, but not actual grievance. Once action is taken, then we can re-examine how things stand - until then, let's all try to just relax and provide useful, constructive feedback to try to make the best of a bad situation. while I agree with this from one perspective. By changing the asset from a future growth asset to a fixed asset, it has devalued the asset to the tune of a penny on the dollar. None of us would have paid the price we did, if this asset had been fixed to the numbers we just received for all time. We do know that "something else" is going to happen and it has been declared "very very good". I don't mind losing value because the future growth under performed, but not through arbitrary price fixing (i.e. hashrate is fixed, now the asset is fixed value on a declining scale over time). I can't agree that no value was removed and we're all where we were a couple weeks ago, so move along. There has been harm done to this asset, if you don't agree, go take a look at the trading thread. All that said, I am still waiting for answers, but will not idly sit by because I trust someone else has my best interests in mind. There are time limits to everyone's patience. My opinion only, but it will govern my actions. Yes, that is exactly my point - see the part in bold. Of course a permanent fix of all bonds with no future splitting would be a disaster, nobody is questioning that. However, until we hear about how future hashrate increases will be passed on to bondholders, there has essentially been no news. People are shitting the bed, yes, but there has not been any actual news. Regarding bond prices, yes, value has dropped. However, if the news comes that everything is just as it was, then the bond price should return to exactly what it was before. If it doesn't then there is a buying opportunity. As I (and many others) have said before, it all comes down to what happens with future hashrate (obviously). |
|
|
|
I don't think anyone here should lawyer up, report anything or do anything legally until something at least happens that actually defrauds you. Since the new hardware has not gone online yet, the most that has happened is everyone has gained an increase in hashing power from I believe 280mh to 300mh.
It's primarily about next steps beyond that, which we're all waiting to hear about. In the short term, everyone needs to chill out and wait to hear what is going to happen.
This is a valid and important point. As of yet, nothing has actually happened apart from some news worrying (and riling) people. Since consensus is that nobody cares what happens with respect to the bond/contract terminology or splits etc, (so long as the spirit of the original agreement is honoured), it is all about how future hardware deployment is passed on to current bondholders. That is the issue at hand. Until action is taken in this regard, as opposed to words, people have no cause for grievance. Annoyance yes, but not actual grievance. Once action is taken, then we can re-examine how things stand - until then, let's all try to just relax and provide useful, constructive feedback to try to make the best of a bad situation. |
|
|
|
Let me ask.
Is there any over reaction of emotions going on on my part or others?
Is this the end of LRM?
Talk to me goose... or geese.
Maybe so, maybe not. Thus far there has been no explicit mention of what will happen to the hardware on order, so until we know how that will be dealt, with this is almost not even news, just a change of wording. |
|
|
|
The silence from Merlin, as a major bond holder, is deafening.
Looks like he will get a CTO with 'no baggage'
Long time no see everyone, just popping in to clear up a few things. 1) I have been emigrating and super busy with a bunch of things these last few months and haven't been reading this forum or even this thread. I was prompted to pop back in today and have caught up with the posts since "the announcement" but have not read anything else since around p. 110 of this thread. I intend to catch up, but it will take some time. 2) It took me a while to work out what the second sentence above meant, but I've got it now and I want to clear something up: Whilst my real name is indeed Merlin, I am not the Merlin from Coinseed. We do indeed share an extremely unusual name, so I can see why people would assume this, but I am not him. I imagine this was conjectured at some point in the period I was away, so I just thought I should clarify that, whilst I am a major bondholder in LRM, I am not Merlin Kauffman. Clearly a lot is going on at the moment, and I'm sure I will post about it here at some point, but just wanted to say that I am, as of today, reading this thread again, and clarify the fact that I am not the guy from Coinseed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
