Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 10:33:08 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Jonathan Ryan Owens locked Rebate, Zip.A, Alberto & BDT thread  (Read 10204 times)
RaggedMonk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 17, 2012, 07:17:11 PM
 #41


JRO, from the paste:
Quote
I also informed Alberto that I would continue to do my best to block him at
every turn...

JRO seems vengeful and angry.  Between the sockpuppeting and this paste, I'm beginning to think JRO is responsible (or coordinating with those who are) for the BDT hack. 

There are some big questions about how he is managing his money.  People who saw ZIP or REBATE as good investments are going to bail regardless - a loan from a deadbeat is very different than a bond/equity in a growing business.   

Sorrry Kluge, but his reputation is already dead from where I'm looking.  I'd recommend dumping and getting out while you can.
1711665188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711665188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711665188
Reply with quote  #2

1711665188
Report to moderator
1711665188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711665188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711665188
Reply with quote  #2

1711665188
Report to moderator
BitcoinCleanup.com: Learn why Bitcoin isn't bad for the environment
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711665188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711665188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711665188
Reply with quote  #2

1711665188
Report to moderator
1711665188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711665188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711665188
Reply with quote  #2

1711665188
Report to moderator
1711665188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711665188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711665188
Reply with quote  #2

1711665188
Report to moderator
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1014


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 08:03:49 PM
 #42

You guys lost money? This is why I dare not to touch any GLBSE funds with a ten foot pole.

kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1014


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 08:31:33 PM
 #43

not all GLBSE operations are like this, just like all BTC operations are not Bitcoinica...but yeah.. there has been some epic fail.

Frankly, the people who make the most money will be the people who hide all their money under their mattress rather than invest in sketchy companies formed entirely over the internet.

Unless there is some kind of formal mechanism and ways to hold officeholders responsible, I am not investing a bit.

Coinoisseur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:17:54 PM
 #44

Unfortunately the Bitcoinica folks have made your suggestion less palatable to most. Waiting has the highest chance of succeeding if you have someone guiding the process so it is in the interest of investors (receivership etc.). Otherwise it just gives more time to blur responsibility and muddy evidence.

People who run shady or negligent operations need to be held as accountable as possible. Otherwise it will add unnecessary difficulties to well run operations.

You can't collect from someone with no money, and a shitstorm will damage reputation necessary to collect funds for payback.

I suggest everyone just keep calm, and give this a couple months' more time. Investors could be screwed, yes, but collecting at this point won't salvage much. We can be angry, but try to keep it out of mind for a while. These various securities have effectively become loans, and I can speak from experience to say it's a very bad idea to ruin someone in trying to collect money when they need to collect money themselves. Loans need to be symbiotic, and that means you can't immediately turn on the rape switch when someone's in default. To do otherwise would result in tragedy for everyone with their neck out. Partial loan calls can be symbiotic if it forces a business/individual to cut away all the fat, but in this case, we'd be taking all his meat.... okay - bad analogy.


JRO might speak in depth, eventually... hopefully - but at this point, it seems we're better off expecting repayment within a year, and not demanding answers in the meantime. I believe I am most exposed, fwiw. I don't mean to be a bully, and I have no authority to do so, but I would very much unappreciate actions which harm JRO, as it harms everyone with money in him. Especially if you have nothing at stake, please shut up.  Kiss

ETA: Not directed at anyone in particular.

                                                                               
                
                                                       ╓▄▌██P                  
                                                 ╔▄▌███▀███▌                   
                                           ▄▄▌██▀▀╚  ╓██╩██                    
                                     ▄▄███▀▀╙      ▄██  ▓█                     
                               ▄▌███▀▀+          ▄█▀   ▐█                      
                        ,▄▌███▀▀¬              ▓█▀     █▄                      
                  ,▄▌███▀▀                  ,██▀      █▌                       
               '█████▌▄▄,                 ╓██╩       ██                        
                  ▀██▌▐▀▀▀█████▌▌▄▄╓    ▄██¬        ▄█                         
                     ▀██▄        ╚▀▀▀████          ▐█═                         
                        ▀██▄        ▓█▀██          █▀                          
                           ▀██▄  ,██▀   █µ        ██                           
                              ▀███Z     ██       ██                            
                                ▐██     ▐█      ▄█                             
                              ,,╓╓█▓▄▌   █▌    ▐█U                             
                        º▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓███   ▀█    █▌                              
                          ▀█▓▓▓▓▓████▀█▌  █▌  ██                               
                            ▀███████▌  ▀█µ▀█ ██                                
                              ▀█████     ███▓█                                 
                                ▐███      ▀██Ñ                                 
                                            ▀                             

repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 12:55:35 AM
 #45

There are some big questions about how he is managing his money.  People who saw ZIP or REBATE as good investments are going to bail regardless - a loan from a deadbeat is very different than a bond/equity in a growing business.   

People shouldn't be putting money they can't afford to lose or to which they need short-term access into these ventures anyway, but the moment any question about how funds are being used arises people are going to become understandably reluctant to leave their money in the hands of the person whose actions are under scrutiny for another day/week/month/year.

There's nothing to stop those who are willing to wait for payment from voluntarily placing themselves at the back of the line, but there's also no reason why others shouldn't require more information about how funds have been spent to date and just how large the hole is before deciding whether they're prepared to wait for payment or not.  Some people will let their investment ride on faith and others will want to recover what money they can and invest it in projects they consider more viable. 

With increased use of crowd funding comes increased accountability.  Investors aren't personal benefactors and that needs to be acknowledged by those seeking funding for their projects.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
stochastic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 02:12:06 AM
 #46

There are some big questions about how he is managing his money.  People who saw ZIP or REBATE as good investments are going to bail regardless - a loan from a deadbeat is very different than a bond/equity in a growing business.   

People shouldn't be putting money they can't afford to lose or to which they need short-term access into these ventures anyway, but the moment any question about how funds are being used arises people are going to become understandably reluctant to leave their money in the hands of the person whose actions are under scrutiny for another day/week/month/year.

There's nothing to stop those who are willing to wait for payment from voluntarily placing themselves at the back of the line, but there's also no reason why others shouldn't require more information about how funds have been spent to date and just how large the hole is before deciding whether they're prepared to wait for payment or not.  Some people will let their investment ride on faith and others will want to recover what money they can and invest it in projects they consider more viable. 

With increased use of crowd funding comes increased accountability.  Investors aren't personal benefactors and that needs to be acknowledged by those seeking funding for their projects.

Just as a surveillance society with the ambition of making the world more open end up making a culture of secrecy, the bitcoin culture with its theme of anonymity will lead to a completely open society.  In the future I don't expect many in the bitcoin world will be willing to invest or loan to anyone not willing to publically release personal information and remove any attempt to have limited liability.

In a few months there will be bitscalper part 3 so be prepared.

Introducing constraints to the economy only serves to limit what can be economical.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 02:39:52 AM
 #47

JRO received from Zipconf and Rebate IPO approximately 10000btc.
Where he spent all this funds? Or all this funds were stolen from the Kronos?
I do not believe it! Why it was necessary to deposit such sum to the beta project?
I invested btc in zipconf and rebate, why I'm losing all their funds because of the Kronos hack? I would like to hear a clear answer from the JRO, what happened with 10000 btc, which were obtained from the IPO?


5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.





Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 03:27:38 AM
 #48

WTF, so let me get this straight... MNW spent countless hours trying to convince everyone that leo/Coinexchanger/Maria was bitscalper and he was working with the real bitscalper on kronos.io all the time.

Priceless!

lol

repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 03:52:51 AM
 #49

JRO received from Zipconf and Rebate IPO approximately 10000btc.
Where he spent all this funds? Or all this funds were stolen from the Kronos?
I do not believe it! Why it was necessary to deposit such sum to the beta project?
I invested btc in zipconf and rebate, why I'm losing all their funds because of the Kronos hack? I would like to hear a clear answer from the JRO, what happened with 10000 btc, which were obtained from the IPO?


5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.


I think people are wondering where the money came from for other projects the same people were working on and whether any of the funds raised for Zipconf and rebate was used on those other projects.  It should really be a simple matter to issue a "here's what was raised, here's what's left, and here's how we spent the rest" statement for both Zipconf and rebate and reluctance to do so will only generate suspicion and distrust.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 05:43:40 PM
 #50

JRO received from Zipconf and Rebate IPO approximately 10000btc.
Where he spent all this funds? Or all this funds were stolen from the Kronos?
I do not believe it! Why it was necessary to deposit such sum to the beta project?
I invested btc in zipconf and rebate, why I'm losing all their funds because of the Kronos hack? I would like to hear a clear answer from the JRO, what happened with 10000 btc, which were obtained from the IPO?


5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.
You have a source on 5k in JRO's Gox account?
Rockefoten
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 20, 2012, 06:11:11 PM
 #51

5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.

What do you mean by hasn't worked? You mean hasn't been operational or just not working fullt as intended or having lots of bugs? I'm asking, because I wasn't aware of this and according to dividend payments, ZipConf was collecting around 250+ BTC in fees per week up until the end of July, which would be a bit suspicious if it wasn't operational...
Serge
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 20, 2012, 06:16:42 PM
 #52

I think people are wondering where the money came from for other projects the same people were working on and whether any of the funds raised for Zipconf and rebate was used on those other projects.  It should really be a simple matter to issue a "here's what was raised, here's what's left, and here's how we spent the rest" statement for both Zipconf and rebate and reluctance to do so will only generate suspicion and distrust.

Exactly.
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 06:34:12 PM
 #53

5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.

What do you mean by hasn't worked? You mean hasn't been operational or just not working fullt as intended or having lots of bugs? I'm asking, because I wasn't aware of this and according to dividend payments, ZipConf was collecting around 250+ BTC in fees per week up until the end of July, which would be a bit suspicious if it wasn't operational...
ZipConf is currently unable to prevent sophisticated double-spends, like a Finney attack. AFAIK, it can prevent very simple double-spends, but basically it'd act mostly as an insurance agent, which just makes it a giant target for sophisticated attacks. When it was brought up that the entire system should be re-coded, it was thought to be too expensive, and the project was put on the back-burner. So, it just sits in "beta."

I doubt the dividends were "accurate."
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 06:42:06 PM
 #54

5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.

What do you mean by hasn't worked? You mean hasn't been operational or just not working fullt as intended or having lots of bugs? I'm asking, because I wasn't aware of this and according to dividend payments, ZipConf was collecting around 250+ BTC in fees per week up until the end of July, which would be a bit suspicious if it wasn't operational...
ZipConf is currently unable to prevent sophisticated double-spends, like a Finney attack. AFAIK, it can prevent very simple double-spends, but basically it'd act mostly as an insurance agent, which just makes it a giant target for sophisticated attacks. When it was brought up that the entire system should be re-coded, it was thought to be too expensive, and the project was put on the back-burner. So, it just sits in "beta."

I doubt the dividends were "accurate."

A Ponzi, you mean. Paying dividends to investors from the investors own money until it ran out, right?
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 07:23:49 PM
 #55

5000btc of it is sitting in Mt Gox in JRO's name. This account was setup just after the "hack of Kronos.This account has been frozen.

The other 5000 ? Wasted on developing Zipconf which hasnt worked from day one.

What do you mean by hasn't worked? You mean hasn't been operational or just not working fullt as intended or having lots of bugs? I'm asking, because I wasn't aware of this and according to dividend payments, ZipConf was collecting around 250+ BTC in fees per week up until the end of July, which would be a bit suspicious if it wasn't operational...
ZipConf is currently unable to prevent sophisticated double-spends, like a Finney attack. AFAIK, it can prevent very simple double-spends, but basically it'd act mostly as an insurance agent, which just makes it a giant target for sophisticated attacks. When it was brought up that the entire system should be re-coded, it was thought to be too expensive, and the project was put on the back-burner. So, it just sits in "beta."

I doubt the dividends were "accurate."

A Ponzi, you mean. Paying dividends to investors from the investors own money until it ran out, right?
Looks like 750-850BTC was paid out in dividends. He allegedly raised 10kBTC (I think it's more likely he paid someone like INAU buy the bulk of shares at a discount and resell them, which isn't too uncommon), and of course he didn't issue more shares of Zip.A, so I'm not sure that's much of a Ponzi. However, he did launch REBATE soon after. I'm not sure how much that one raised -- I never liked the idea much... I'm assuming it raised significantly less than ZIP.A. Again, however, that one I know was sold to a large purchaser/reseller who does roughly the same job as an underwriter - takes the risk and hassle of the IPO, but has a great profit margin unless things go South.

Kronos was scheduled to raise funds after REBATE, but I started some shit with the GLBSE team over launching a competing service, and the Kronos IPO was promptly cancelled by GLBSE, with ZIP.A/REBATE/BDK/BDK.BND frozen for a while. We never re-tried a Kronos IPO, because the service was compromised at almost the same time, which led to Alberto being removed. That was problematic, since he was one of the lead devs. Another was found (the service had to be built from the ground-up because the code was no longer trusted), but he ended up declining. There was, for a time, talk also about raising funds for 20Mission. This obviously won't go forward until the situation changes dramatically, but that may be fine, since they don't need to pay rent until January, I believe, and the idea makes good business sense, even excluding commercial leasing ideas.

Obviously, funds were being muddied. The solution to that was to launch "IceHill," which would've made the sloppy accounting more acceptable, where the parent company would move funds around as needed, instead of having isolated projects which'd need to raise funds by themselves. Based in Iceland, IceHill would be the parent company of the service-providers. The IP rights were to be held by RingCoin, based in SFO, and still in existence, AFAIK. Unfortunately, IceHill ended up existing de facto as JRO, with him moving funds around to different projects as he pleased, without respecting accounting barriers (AFAIK). I'm not much one to talk, though... I fairly frequently mix business funds with personal funds.
Rockefoten
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 20, 2012, 07:31:02 PM
 #56


ZipConf is currently unable to prevent sophisticated double-spends, like a Finney attack. AFAIK, it can prevent very simple double-spends, but basically it'd act mostly as an insurance agent, which just makes it a giant target for sophisticated attacks. When it was brought up that the entire system should be re-coded, it was thought to be too expensive, and the project was put on the back-burner. So, it just sits in "beta."

I doubt the dividends were "accurate."

A Ponzi, you mean. Paying dividends to investors from the investors own money until it ran out, right?

Wow, thanks for your answer Kluge, I didn't know this. So it's actually outright fraud, pretending to run a business with income while it's not even operational. I bought shares (luckily not many) based partly on the previous dividends, as the contract explicitly stated dividends would represent 1/50000 of fees. This gave me the impression that the business was up and running and generating income.
I know due-dilligence and all that, but I haven't seen anything about this before in the forums and I'm not the only one, as the bond traded for more than double of face value after I bought.

It wouldn't have bothered me as much if I invested in a venture that turned out to be unprofitable and I lost money, as long as the issuer was honest and did his/her best.

But it does bother me that ZIP.A turned out to be more or less a fraud, and I'm not gong to lie, I was fooled big time.
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 07:44:28 PM
 #57

I don't think I'd go so far as to call it a fraud to pay out "false dividends." Sloppy, though, to perhaps be generous. I know Goat, for example, paid dividends to shareholders of TyGrr when he said he was operating at a loss, and I've paid gratuity dividends to holders of both BDK and BDK.BND, even though I was not contractually obligated to, and it cut into the company's equity, which at least affects holders of BDK. I did make sure to state the dividends were not from BDK profit, however.

ETA: If anyone wants any other questions answered, I'll tell anything I know, with one exception, being why JRO has been despondent and self-isolated for a few weeks, and has not made payments, as that involves something personal to him which I wouldn't feel right about disclosing without permission. I'll probably disclose that story eventually if I'm convinced not to expect repayment, though.
Rockefoten
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 20, 2012, 07:53:31 PM
 #58

I don't think I'd go so far as to call it a fraud to pay out "false dividends." Sloppy, though, to perhaps be generous. I know Goat, for example, paid dividends to shareholders of TyGrr when he said he was operating at a loss, and I've paid gratuity dividends to holders of both BDK and BDK.BND, even though I was not contractually obligated to, and it cut into the company's equity, which at least affects holders of BDK. I did make sure to state the dividends were not from BDK profit, however.

To me, the difference between ZIP.A and the examples with Goat and yourself is that Goat and you were open about what you did. ZIP.A was not. Nowhere did anyone say that the dividends were not coming from fees, so I was led to believe that the business was generating fees, which it was not. Needless to say, if I had known that dividends were not coming from operating fees, I would never have bought.
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 08:05:49 PM
 #59

I don't think I'd go so far as to call it a fraud to pay out "false dividends." Sloppy, though, to perhaps be generous. I know Goat, for example, paid dividends to shareholders of TyGrr when he said he was operating at a loss, and I've paid gratuity dividends to holders of both BDK and BDK.BND, even though I was not contractually obligated to, and it cut into the company's equity, which at least affects holders of BDK. I did make sure to state the dividends were not from BDK profit, however.

To me, the difference between ZIP.A and the examples with Goat and yourself is that Goat and you were open about what you did. ZIP.A was not. Nowhere did anyone say that the dividends were not coming from fees, so I was led to believe that the business was generating fees, which it was not. Needless to say, if I had known that dividends were not coming from operating fees, I would never have bought.

Yes I was open and saying I had the hardware yet it kept going down and I did not have the time so I paid out of pocket at a huge loss. That is not at all fraud or a ponzi.

Shocked you would bring this up as I'm sure everyone can tell the difference.
There is obviously a difference, though there's a similarity in that equity's being removed (maybe not in your case) to pay dividends at a loss, which is where the Ponzi claim was coming from, I assumed. I wasn't trying to defend the lack of communication, and lack of transparency.
Coinoisseur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 20, 2012, 10:24:05 PM
 #60

I don't think I'd go so far as to call it a fraud to pay out "false dividends."

From ZipConf.A contract on GLBSE:

Each bond has a face value of 0.5 BTC and gives the holder the right to 1/50,000 of all fees collected by the ZipConf service (“Issuer”), paid weekly (Friday) based on the prior week's earnings. Bonds have no voting rights. The Issuer has the right to terminate the asset in the event of insolvency by liquidating any company savings and pay out a final dividend. The Issuer has the right to buy back, at any time, all bonds issued for twice the price of the previous 120 hour average market price.

---

So paying dividends, from 05/07/12 to 07/30/12, would indicate to holders that fees were being collected. Not sure what kinder spin could be made of paying dividends for 2 months and then having it come out that the service never left the design stage. Have yet to hear of an orderly wind down due to "insolvency" nor of a buy back.

                                                                               
                
                                                       ╓▄▌██P                  
                                                 ╔▄▌███▀███▌                   
                                           ▄▄▌██▀▀╚  ╓██╩██                    
                                     ▄▄███▀▀╙      ▄██  ▓█                     
                               ▄▌███▀▀+          ▄█▀   ▐█                      
                        ,▄▌███▀▀¬              ▓█▀     █▄                      
                  ,▄▌███▀▀                  ,██▀      █▌                       
               '█████▌▄▄,                 ╓██╩       ██                        
                  ▀██▌▐▀▀▀█████▌▌▄▄╓    ▄██¬        ▄█                         
                     ▀██▄        ╚▀▀▀████          ▐█═                         
                        ▀██▄        ▓█▀██          █▀                          
                           ▀██▄  ,██▀   █µ        ██                           
                              ▀███Z     ██       ██                            
                                ▐██     ▐█      ▄█                             
                              ,,╓╓█▓▄▌   █▌    ▐█U                             
                        º▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓███   ▀█    █▌                              
                          ▀█▓▓▓▓▓████▀█▌  █▌  ██                               
                            ▀███████▌  ▀█µ▀█ ██                                
                              ▀█████     ███▓█                                 
                                ▐███      ▀██Ñ                                 
                                            ▀                             

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!