TYGRR.* assets on GLBSE delisted.

[Smoovious]

This was sent to GLBSE support.

"I'm not preventing you from repaying me the bitcoins of mine that you hold. Just send them to XXXXXXXXXXXX. Now you have no excuse not to repay me amounts that aren't in dispute. But I refuse to release you from any obligations or liability. Holding the Bitcoins you agree you owe me hostage to obtain concessions on a legitimate dispute is scamming."

When I get the funds I will make a note of it. However it is still unclear what will happen to the assets in my account.

See, now this is exactly the kind of thing that has been going on that is making it so damned hard for me to see Goat as credible through this.

He is claiming that he wasn't preventing the return of his BTC, and finally supplies a BTC address (unless he actually sent XXXXXXXXXXXX)... claiming that they were being held hostage, when without an address to send them to, Nefario had no choice but to hold onto them. Saying they were being held hostage implies that Nefario actually had a choice to still have them. Without a withdrawl address (until now), what other choice did he have with them? So, who was the one actually holding them hostage, Nefario without an address to send them to, or Goat, who up until now, refused to supply a withdrawl address in the first place?

Goat, you may actually have a valid argument somewhere in everything you're spouting, but you're constantly exaggerating and escalating, burying whatever argument you're trying to put forth. It is making you less than credible.

-- Smoov

[pyrkne]

This was sent to GLBSE support.

"I'm not preventing you from repaying me the bitcoins of mine that you hold. Just send them to XXXXXXXXXXXX. Now you have no excuse not to repay me amounts that aren't in dispute. But I refuse to release you from any obligations or liability. Holding the Bitcoins you agree you owe me hostage to obtain concessions on a legitimate dispute is scamming."

When I get the funds I will make a note of it. However it is still unclear what will happen to the assets in my account.

See, now this is exactly the kind of thing that has been going on that is making it so damned hard for me to see Goat as credible through this.

He is claiming that he wasn't preventing the return of his BTC, and finally supplies a BTC address (unless he actually sent XXXXXXXXXXXX)... claiming that they were being held hostage, when without an address to send them to, Nefario had no choice but to hold onto them. Saying they were being held hostage implies that Nefario actually had a choice to still have them. Without a withdrawl address (until now), what other choice did he have with them? So, who was the one actually holding them hostage, Nefario without an address to send them to, or Goat, who up until now, refused to supply a withdrawl address in the first place?

Goat, you may actually have a valid argument somewhere in everything you're spouting, but you're constantly exaggerating and escalating, burying whatever argument you're trying to put forth. It is making you less than credible.

-- Smoov

Instead of reading your post, I saved time and instead imagined you making fun of Goat and defending Nefario.

I recommend this strategy to others who value their time.

[Dalkore]

Nefario's silence on this issue basically supports the case that this was personally motivated.   He has logged in multiple times and I am quite sure he is aware of the numerous people that have asked for his official statement on this situation. 








Caveat Emptor

[pyrkne]

Nefario's silence on this issue basically supports the case that this was personally motivated.   He has logged in multiple times and I am quite sure he is aware of the numerous people that have asked for his official statement on this situation. 








Caveat Emptor

His silence is so out of place that for a day or two, I assumed there had been an official statement. I assumed I must have just missed it.

So now we're left wondering... will we have more information by the weekend? By next week?

I swear when I started reading these forums, Nefario was quite active.

[JoelKatz]

He is claiming that he wasn't preventing the return of his BTC, and finally supplies a BTC address (unless he actually sent XXXXXXXXXXXX)... claiming that they were being held hostage, when without an address to send them to, Nefario had no choice but to hold onto them. Saying they were being held hostage implies that Nefario actually had a choice to still have them. Without a withdrawl address (until now), what other choice did he have with them? So, who was the one actually holding them hostage, Nefario without an address to send them to, or Goat, who up until now, refused to supply a withdrawl address in the first place?

I believe that Nefario was making Goat conditional offers to return the coins that Goat reasonably interpreted as waiving some of his claims against GLBSE. So Goat did exactly the right thing -- he put an unconditional request for the return of undisputed amounts on the table. If you have any evidence that Nefario or GLBSE ever offered to return the funds that didn't require Goat to waive claims he considered legitimate, please cite it. But the lack of such an offer can reasonably be described as holding the coins hostage.

Goat is documenting his side in the forums in great detail. That makes it very easy to find some minor thing you think is inconsistent. And you keep imagining perfect conduct on the part of GLBSE and Nefario, despite their total silence. If Nefario or GLBSE made an unconditional offer, let them say so. Otherwise, it's grossly unfair for you to imagine that they must have been perfectly willing to do the right thing all along.

By the way, I'm not sure how you figured that this was the first time Goat offered him an address to send the coins to. This may have been one in a long series of similar requests from Goat, just the first he chose to make public. I don't know either way. Without Nefario or GLBSE's side, we can only guess. And again, it appears you made the assumption most unfavorable to Goat. You may know. You may be right. But the rest of us don't know.

Do you at least agree that now there is no excuse for Nefario/GLBSE not returning to Goat amounts that are not in dispute?

[markm]

Do all the issuers who someone kicked off the platform owned shares of get given these codes, so they can track for themselves those of their shareholders who are unable to use GLBSE anymore?

For example if I had an offering on GLBSE of which Goat bought some, would I too have been put in this position of being offered codes, and have to hope Goat got in touch with me with his code to "redeem" his shares I issued that suddenly are not handled by GLBSE?

-MarkM-

[pyrkne]

Do all the issuers who someone kicked off the platform owned shares of get given these codes, so they can track for themselves those of their shareholders who are unable to use GLBSE anymore?

For example if I had an offering on GLBSE of which Goat bought some, would I too have been put in this position of being offered codes, and have to hope Goat got in touch with me with the his code to "redeem" his shares I issued that suddenly are not handled by GLBSE?

-MarkM-

So many questions... so little Nefario.

Nefario! Come out of your cave!

There's interesting discussion to be had!

[MPOE-PR]

Do all the issuers who someone kicked off the platform owned shares of get given these codes, so they can track for themselves those of their shareholders who are unable to use GLBSE anymore?

For example if I had an offering on GLBSE of which Goat bought some, would I too have been put in this position of being offered codes, and have to hope Goat got in touch with me with the his code to "redeem" his shares I issued that suddenly are not handled by GLBSE?

-MarkM-

So many questions... so little Nefario.

Nefario! Come out of your cave!

There's interesting discussion to be had!

Sep 20 01:33:16 <nefario>   what can I say, mircea has more time to piss away on IRC than me, let him have this domain
Sep 20 01:33:41 <smickles>   o, more popcorn fodder?
Sep 20 01:33:53 <mircea_popescu>   the only reason i'm not routing you off the forum is cause the forum isn't worth the effort.
Sep 20 01:34:04 <mircea_popescu>   if idiots like mathew wright can dick around there so can idiots like you.
Sep 20 01:34:30 <midnightmagic>   Who's kakobrekla >?
Sep 20 01:34:39 <kakobrekla>   me
Sep 20 01:34:55 <nefario>   lol
Sep 20 01:34:56 <midnightmagic>   Yes, but do you operate something? You are listed as channel founder: what was the purpose of this channel meant to be?
Sep 20 01:34:56 <nefario>   you're no one
Sep 20 01:35:07 <nefario>   he runs assbot I think
Sep 20 01:35:14 <mircea_popescu>   kakobrekla lol i admire you not booting the idiot at this point. i would have.
Sep 20 01:35:26 <mircea_popescu>   nefario he owns the chanel. and you're 15.
Sep 20 01:35:52 <nefario>   with mild alopecia
Sep 20 01:36:05 *   ChanServ gives channel operator status to kakobrekla
Sep 20 01:36:08 <kakobrekla>   what is the issue here
Sep 20 01:36:19 <smickles>   
Sep 20 01:36:22 <nefario>   with alopecia?
Sep 20 01:36:37 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [PAJKA.BOND] 4 @ 0.081 = 0.324 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:36:39 <nefario>   no, just saying if I'm 15 then I've got a hair problem
Sep 20 01:37:01 <copumpkin>   o.O
Sep 20 01:37:20 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [PAJKA.BOND] 1 @ 0.0815 BTC

Sep 20 01:37:30 <assbot>   [MPEX] [F.GIGA.ETF] 5580 @ 0.000264 = 1.4731 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:37:32 <assbot>   [MPEX] [F.GIGA.ETF] 620 @ 0.00026371 = 0.1635 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:37:33 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 6150 @ 0.00040681 = 2.5019 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:37:34 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 14650 @ 0.00040555 = 5.9413 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:38:18 <smickles>   tits
Sep 20 01:38:22 <kakobrekla>   this is a free for all
Sep 20 01:38:30 <kakobrekla>   you can insult eachother as you please
Sep 20 01:38:36 <kakobrekla>   if you cant take it, leave
Sep 20 01:38:44 <kakobrekla>   im not going to ban anyone at this point
Sep 20 01:38:47 <kakobrekla>   thanks.
Sep 20 01:39:07 *   kakobrekla removes channel operator status from kakobrekla
Sep 20 01:39:09 <mircea_popescu>   admirable.
Sep 20 01:39:41 *   smickles stands outside of kakobrekla's window and imitates the whitest kids you know racewar skit
Sep 20 01:40:15 <smickles>   come on man, race war. let's go!
Sep 20 01:40:22 <BTC-Mining>   and Kako is right, in my opinion.
Sep 20 01:40:25 <kakobrekla>   usagi, extensive spaming for example
Sep 20 01:40:36 <kakobrekla>   repeating the same line over and over again
Sep 20 01:40:37 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [YABMC] 1 @ 0.077 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:40:39 <kakobrekla>   exactly the same.
Sep 20 01:40:42 <kakobrekla>   that would get you banned.
Sep 20 01:40:51 <nefario>   *** PENIS PILLS **** WWW>PENIPILLS>COM
Sep 20 01:41:09 <mircea_popescu>   i told you he's 15.
Sep 20 01:41:22 <kakobrekla>   better to let everyone shine in their true light
Sep 20 01:41:30 <kakobrekla>   if i ban someone, we will be short of that info
Sep 20 01:42:12 <mircea_popescu>   jesus he's so close to my own philosophy i could try.
Sep 20 01:42:15 <mircea_popescu>   i could cry*
Sep 20 01:42:28 *   Bugpowder (cef100f9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.206.241.0.249) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Sep 20 01:42:57 <kakobrekla>   i would ban highlevelminer for example
Sep 20 01:43:59 <kakobrekla>   hm
Sep 20 01:44:00 <kakobrekla>   accually
Sep 20 01:44:08 <kakobrekla>   i had a wicked idea a few days ago
Sep 20 01:44:11 <kakobrekla>   if you want it
Sep 20 01:44:15 <kakobrekla>   i will implement it
Sep 20 01:44:52 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FDBF] 13 @ 0.14500003 = 1.885 BTC

Sep 20 01:44:53 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FDBF] 7 @ 0.14500002 = 1.015 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:44:57 <kakobrekla>   each person can cast a vote for other people to be kicked out of this room, if there is n votes in m, person gets a o minute ban
Sep 20 01:45:07 <kakobrekla>   in m minutes*
Sep 20 01:45:18 <midnightmagic>   kakobrekla: I am not appealing to you to act: I am curious to know the boundaries. I know them now. Thanks for clarifying. Heh heh..
Sep 20 01:45:57 <kakobrekla>   like a self moderation thingy.
Sep 20 01:46:06 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [ASICMINER] 25 @ 0.1099 = 2.7475 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:46:08 <mircea_popescu>   that is a really stupid.
Sep 20 01:46:12 <mircea_popescu>   ideea.
Sep 20 01:46:22 <kakobrekla>   you feel you would fly out quickly eh
Sep 20 01:46:53 <Bugpowder>   What if you had to pay 1BTC per vote, to be distributed to the remaining people in the room?
Sep 20 01:46:58 <kakobrekla>   lol
Sep 20 01:47:19 <mircea_popescu>   kakobrekla think of it this way : i have enough money to hire people to come post here to kick you out.
Sep 20 01:47:23 *   FabianB_ (~ogg@p4FE86AAB.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Sep 20 01:47:53 <mircea_popescu>   in general the value comes from the outliers not from the center. this is why we have silicon valley : to support innovation, not conformity.
Sep 20 01:48:10 <kakobrekla>   fine
Sep 20 01:48:12 <mircea_popescu>   so as an ideea it runs contrary to the very principle of pretty much everything, from bitcoin to freenode all the way to foss.
Sep 20 01:48:13 <kakobrekla>   you asked for moderation
Sep 20 01:48:16 <kakobrekla>   i gave you an option
Sep 20 01:48:18 <kakobrekla>   refused.
Sep 20 01:48:24 <kakobrekla>   we are done with this topic now, for good.
Sep 20 01:48:29 *   FabianB has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
Sep 20 01:48:34 <smickles>   democracy = mob rule
Sep 20 01:48:47 <kakobrekla>   pull your guns back out
Sep 20 01:48:49 <nefario>   anarchy=...anarchy
Sep 20 01:49:19 <mircea_popescu>   nefario anarchy is that system where some guy that's been running the market where scams gather for years doesn't get to play the respectable.
Sep 20 01:49:21 *   Enky (~IceChat77@ip-55-133.sn2.eutelia.it) has left #bitcoin-assets
Sep 20 01:49:25 <mircea_popescu>   yes, you're nto a whore yourself. you're the matron.
Sep 20 01:49:49 <BTC-Mining>   smickles: indeed, no mob rule
Sep 20 01:50:16 <BTC-Mining>   Enlightened absolutism all the way
Sep 20 01:50:50 <smickles>   we just need an appeal to god, that's all
Sep 20 01:51:00 <mircea_popescu>   for to give us
Sep 20 01:51:02 <mircea_popescu>   watermelons!
Sep 20 01:51:27 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [UDN] 3 @ 0.03498999 = 0.105 BTC [-]
Sep 20 01:52:23 <BTC-Mining>   Hmm... I'd be all for watermelons
Sep 20 01:52:24 <smickles>   wait,
Sep 20 01:52:41 <smickles>   the movie version of the emperor caligulaQ!!!
Sep 20 01:56:05 <smickles>   ;;bc,24hprc
Sep 20 01:56:07 <gribble>   12.37
Sep 20 01:56:39 <dub>   kakobrekla: they had that in #bitcoin a year ago, it got gamed
Sep 20 01:56:50 <dub>   longer than that maybe
Sep 20 01:56:54 <kakobrekla>   aha
Sep 20 01:56:58 <kakobrekla>   i was not aware of that
Sep 20 01:57:03 <dub>   it was neat
Sep 20 01:57:35 <dub>   if people said 'thanks dub' you got karma points, eventually you got voice, then you could !+b loser and if enough voices agreed they got banned
Sep 20 01:57:53 <kakobrekla>   o cute
Sep 20 01:59:05 <smickles>   people
Sep 20 01:59:42 <nefario>   Smoovious: or 100% are self serving
Sep 20 01:59:48 <nefario>   but not a mix
Sep 20 02:00:07 <nefario>   not exactly
Sep 20 02:01:40 *   Bugpowder has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
Sep 20 02:02:56 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [UDN] 3 @ 0.03498999 = 0.105 BTC [-]
Sep 20 02:03:03 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 36400 @ 0.00041085 = 14.9549 BTC

Sep 20 02:04:27 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [GSDPT] 1 @ 0.0034 BTC

Sep 20 02:07:06 *   jurov is now known as jurov|away
Sep 20 02:07:10 *   PhantomSpark|2 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
Sep 20 02:07:46 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FUTUREFUND] 1 @ 0.00012936 BTC

Sep 20 02:08:22 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FUTUREFUND] 1 @ 0.00012936 BTC

Sep 20 02:11:14 <kakobrekla>   nefario >> Alberto was also involved in another case of fraud, http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/09/ensos-zenpad-is-vaporware-get-refunds-while-they-last/
Sep 20 02:11:15 <kakobrekla>   lol
Sep 20 02:11:20 <kakobrekla>   this was known for what, half a year?
Sep 20 02:11:54 <kakobrekla>   twas in the the first failed bdt thread
Sep 20 02:11:55 <kakobrekla>   oh well
Sep 20 02:12:28 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [YARR] 1 @ 1.001 BTC

Sep 20 02:12:48 <nefario>   fuck this talk like a pirate day
Sep 20 02:12:58 <nefario>   cant understand any of the fucking links in reddit
Sep 20 02:13:20 <copumpkin>   avast!
Sep 20 02:13:40 <kakobrekla>   again with the pirate.
Sep 20 02:13:48 <copumpkin>   arr
Sep 20 02:13:51 <copumpkin>   aye
Sep 20 02:14:10 <kakobrekla>   is that dude still present on irc anyway
Sep 20 02:14:34 <nefario>   holler be savin 'stow pillage nsfw
Sep 20 02:14:47 <smickles>   ;;ident pirateat40
Sep 20 02:14:47 <gribble>   Nick 'pirateat40', with hostmask 'pirateat40!~pirateat4@unaffiliated/pirateat40', is not identified.
Sep 20 02:14:56 <smickles>   not right now anyway
Sep 20 02:14:59 *   Shaded (~Shaded@unaffiliated/shaded) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Sep 20 02:15:24 <dub>   yes he is, in #btcst
Sep 20 02:16:03 <assbot>   [MPEX] [F.GIGA.ETF] 12200 @ 0.00027584 = 3.3652 BTC

Sep 20 02:16:05 <kuzetsa>   /who pirateat40
Sep 20 02:16:10 <kuzetsa>   /ns info pirateat40
Sep 20 02:16:15 <kuzetsa>   /ison pirateat40
Sep 20 02:16:17 <kuzetsa>   oh
Sep 20 02:16:30 <kuzetsa>   /me gives the keyboard a funny lool
Sep 20 02:16:33 <kuzetsa>   *look
Sep 20 02:16:55 <dub>   irc is hard
Sep 20 02:17:28 <kuzetsa>   my keyboard has buttons which, when pressed in a certain way make the IRC thing not do normal-like
Sep 20 02:17:29 <smickles>   i thought pirate usually idented when he hopped on
Sep 20 02:18:06 <dub>   not lately
Sep 20 02:18:16 <kuzetsa>   yeah :/
Sep 20 02:18:30 <kuzetsa>   probably too many "leave a message using gribble" hatemails
Sep 20 02:18:58 <kakobrekla>   ;;hate later
Sep 20 02:18:58 <gribble>   Error: "hate" is not a valid command.
Sep 20 02:19:06 <mircea_popescu>   ;;later hate
Sep 20 02:19:07 <gribble>   Error: The "Later" plugin is loaded, but there is no command named "hate" in it.  Try "list Later" to see the commands in the "Later" plugin.
Sep 20 02:19:15 <mircea_popescu>   gribs is an innocent.
Sep 20 02:19:16 <kakobrekla>   ah
Sep 20 02:19:25 <smickles>   ;;ident mircea_popescu
Sep 20 02:19:26 <gribble>   Nick 'mircea_popescu', with hostmask 'mircea_popescu!~Mircea@trilema/mircea-popescu', is not identified.
Sep 20 02:19:30 <smickles>   
Sep 20 02:19:35 <kakobrekla>   scammer
Sep 20 02:19:35 <mircea_popescu>   want me to ident ?
Sep 20 02:19:46 <smickles>   ;;ident
Sep 20 02:19:46 <gribble>   You are identified as user smickles, with GPG key id EA62D7CEB2450C3F, key fingerprint 96ACCA7C3B09EC61B0A6D7F9EA62D7CEB2450C3F, and bitcoin address 12NjnZTVeTJ3g5C7BqfS2aQ2rLkmwiqVz6
Sep 20 02:19:52 <smickles>   mwahaha
Sep 20 02:20:06 <mircea_popescu>   ;;echo No, YOU are identified as user smickles
Sep 20 02:20:07 <gribble>   No, YOU are identified as user smickles
Sep 20 02:20:11 <smickles>   ;;ident kakobrekla
Sep 20 02:20:12 <gribble>   Nick 'kakobrekla', with hostmask 'kakobrekla!~T42@89-212-41-49.static.t-2.net', is not identified.
Sep 20 02:20:24 <kakobrekla>   ;;ident
Sep 20 02:20:24 <gribble>   You are not identified.
Sep 20 02:20:27 <smickles>   scamed by the chanop
Sep 20 02:20:29 <kakobrekla>   pft
Sep 20 02:20:30 <kakobrekla>   ;;ident
Sep 20 02:20:31 <gribble>   You are not identified.
Sep 20 02:20:32 <kakobrekla>   ;;ident
Sep 20 02:20:33 <gribble>   You are identified as user kakobrekla, with GPG key id 27AF75321F2489E8, key fingerprint 27C3CE9A20851312F086268C27AF75321F2489E8, and bitcoin address None
Sep 20 02:20:40 <mircea_popescu>   uh ?!
Sep 20 02:22:19 <kuzetsa>   ;;echo I like cheese
Sep 20 02:22:19 <gribble>   I like cheese
Sep 20 02:22:23 <smickles>   i keep reading the channel mode as +cunt
Sep 20 02:22:24 *   Doffx has quit (Quit: Leaving)
Sep 20 02:22:42 <mircea_popescu>   want sum ? get sum!
Sep 20 02:22:45 <smickles>   .py print ';;ident'
Sep 20 02:22:47 <markac>   ;;ident
Sep 20 02:22:47 <gribble>   You are not identified.
Sep 20 02:22:48 <dub>   ;;later tell kuzetsa not when its in your vagina
Sep 20 02:22:49 <gribble>   The operation succeeded.
Sep 20 02:23:21 <kuzetsa>   the hell
Sep 20 02:23:29 <kuzetsa>   please don't talk about my anatomy
Sep 20 02:23:31 <nefario>   lol
Sep 20 02:23:47 <nefario>   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110709.0;topicseen
Sep 20 02:23:49 <dub>   sif you have a vagoo
Sep 20 02:24:12 <dub>   that looks shooped
Sep 20 02:24:24 <dub>   I can tell because of pixels and nefario is a scammer
Sep 20 02:25:16 <mircea_popescu>   ahaha smickles haxx
Sep 20 02:26:03 <smickles>   mircea_popescu: one day, markac will ident as me
Sep 20 02:26:18 <copumpkin>   ;;ud markac
Sep 20 02:26:19 <gribble>   http://www.urbandictionary.com/products.php?term=Markac&defid=5962291 | ... with your own definition! by pseudonym129874. Definition: A slang term for anal masturbation. Example: That cucumber is perfect for some Markac action ...
Sep 20 02:26:35 <mircea_popescu>   nowai ?!
Sep 20 02:26:51 <mircea_popescu>   im sure vrag uses eggplants anyway.
Sep 20 02:28:04 <smickles>   i just need to wait till markac goes offline, and renick and ,,ident
Sep 20 02:28:36 *   Lucidize has quit (Quit: ...off to see the Wizard)
Sep 20 02:28:38 <dub>   good to see chief bitcoin scammer theymos is weighing in on nefarios crime
Sep 20 02:28:57 *   gabbynot (~Rob@108-81-203-35.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Sep 20 02:29:29 <dub>   cabal wagons circling
Sep 20 02:30:14 *   Shaded has quit (Quit: Shaded)
Sep 20 02:30:22 <mircea_popescu>   eh ?!
Sep 20 02:30:39 <mircea_popescu>   smickles you know it hasn't been offline in weeks ? maybe months.
Sep 20 02:31:07 <dub>   <theymos> good job on violatign this individuals rights nefario, let me get you a fresh gerbil
Sep 20 02:31:27 <smickles>   dub: where is that?
Sep 20 02:31:49 <dub>   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93445.msg1205280#msg1205280
Sep 20 02:32:28 <nefario>   eh the post doesn't say that
Sep 20 02:34:48 <kakobrekla>   >Alberto agreed to this information being published, in the event of him scamming or running with the money, on sending it to me, I wouldn't post it otherwise.
Sep 20 02:34:52 <kakobrekla>   just for a piece of mind
Sep 20 02:35:00 <kakobrekla>   can we see that document signed or something
Sep 20 02:35:08 <mircea_popescu>   peace.
Sep 20 02:35:14 <kakobrekla>   ya
Sep 20 02:35:15 <kakobrekla>   peace
Sep 20 02:35:17 <kakobrekla>   or where
Sep 20 02:35:21 <kakobrekla>   dd he agree to
Sep 20 02:35:24 <kakobrekla>   did*
Sep 20 02:35:26 <smickles>   kakobrekla: with me, it was a conversation, not a document
Sep 20 02:35:45 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [YABMC] 3 @ 0.077 = 0.231 BTC [-]
Sep 20 02:35:48 <dub>   the peace would reside in some piece of mind presumably
Sep 20 02:35:51 <kakobrekla>   you are nef pr now
Sep 20 02:36:03 <smickles>   me?
Sep 20 02:36:10 <kakobrekla>   yes
Sep 20 02:36:24 <smickles>   free btc for EVERYONE~
Sep 20 02:36:32 <nefario>   lol
Sep 20 02:36:41 <kakobrekla>   meh
Sep 20 02:36:51 <kakobrekla>   you guys are hopeless
Sep 20 02:36:54 <mircea_popescu>   this was confusing
Sep 20 02:37:15 <dub>   its not really, you guys are just late to the party
Sep 20 02:37:21 <kakobrekla>   i still didnt get my answer
Sep 20 02:37:30 <kakobrekla>   nefario is just loling
Sep 20 02:37:31 <dub>   the answer is nefario is not to be trusted
Sep 20 02:37:40 <smickles>   sorry kakobrekla, i just meant to say, that nef has my personal details, and there was no document signed about the terms of public release
Sep 20 02:37:52 <kakobrekla>   ahh
Sep 20 02:37:52 <dub>   he appears to be part of a UK based conspiracy to defraud the entire bitcoin community
Sep 20 02:38:00 <kakobrekla>   sorry smickles
Sep 20 02:38:10 <kakobrekla>   thought you were answering as him
Sep 20 02:38:11 <nefario>   dub: just HOW thick IS your tinfoil hat
Sep 20 02:38:25 <nefario>   smickles I spoke with on the phone
Sep 20 02:38:30 <nefario>   asked him on there
Sep 20 02:38:41 <nefario>   Alberto was over email
Sep 20 02:38:48 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 4 @ 0.74897879 = 2.9959 BTC

Sep 20 02:38:49 <kakobrekla>   well nefario, just for your protection, it would help you to have a doc signed about releasing that sort of info
Sep 20 02:38:49 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 9 @ 0.7489788 = 6.7408 BTC

Sep 20 02:38:50 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 2 @ 0.74999 = 1.5 BTC

Sep 20 02:38:51 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 4 @ 0.755 = 3.02 BTC

Sep 20 02:38:53 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 2 @ 0.77 = 1.54 BTC

Sep 20 02:38:56 <kakobrekla>   can save you some trouble you know
Sep 20 02:39:10 <nefario>   yeah I figure as much
Sep 20 02:39:11 <smickles>   nefario: that's what i'm saying, it was a conversation
Sep 20 02:39:22 <nefario>   yeah
Sep 20 02:39:43 <nefario>   like I said I don't just go throwing peoples info about willy nilly
Sep 20 02:40:01 <BTC-Mining>   nefario, get a lawyer to make a valid form to sign regarding this, and send it my way.
Sep 20 02:40:02 <kakobrekla>   noone argues alby is innocent
Sep 20 02:40:16 <mircea_popescu>   well, no-one except himself, i guess.
Sep 20 02:40:20 <nefario>   BTC-Mining: sure
Sep 20 02:40:49 <mircea_popescu>   but to be honest, that entire thing smells bad. it seems more as an attempt for jro/kludge and possibly meni to extract themselves smelling rosy
Sep 20 02:40:55 <mircea_popescu>   than anything.
Sep 20 02:40:56 <nefario>   we'll have to include this in the TOS for asset issuers
Sep 20 02:41:22 <nefario>   kluge is rosy
Sep 20 02:41:30 <nefario>   the guy is paying with his own money
Sep 20 02:41:41 <mircea_popescu>   maybe.
Sep 20 02:41:55 <kakobrekla>   no moonlanding malaimo
Sep 20 02:41:55 <nefario>   he is
Sep 20 02:41:56 <kakobrekla>   eh
Sep 20 02:41:59 <kakobrekla>   mircea_popescu
Sep 20 02:42:12 <nefario>   lasers
Sep 20 02:42:15 <mircea_popescu>   hm ?
Sep 20 02:43:02 <nefario>   you can use lasers to verify there are man made objects on the moon
Sep 20 02:43:03 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 2524 @ 0.00041187 = 1.0396 BTC

Sep 20 02:43:04 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 17276 @ 0.00041296 = 7.1343 BTC

Sep 20 02:43:14 <kakobrekla>   shhh nefario
Sep 20 02:43:24 <nefario>   oh sorry
Sep 20 02:43:43 <nefario>   Eh THEREWERE NOLANDINGSONZEMOOON
Sep 20 02:44:37 <mircea_popescu>   mkay.
Sep 20 02:46:28 *   Audriux9 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
Sep 20 02:47:06 <smickles>   can't you also get time at a nice telescope and see the footprints?
Sep 20 02:47:51 <mircea_popescu>   at any rate it doesn't cunt till someone has sex on the moon.
Sep 20 02:47:55 <smickles>   iirc, that one on that clif in s. california does it from time to time
Sep 20 02:47:58 <nefario>   how do you know it's not a photo on the other end of the lens?
Sep 20 02:48:35 <smickles>   nef have a friendlook at the lense when you look thru it, maybe
Sep 20 02:48:47 <nefario>   how can you trust the fiend?
Sep 20 02:48:53 <nefario>   what if it's like the truman show
Sep 20 02:48:58 <nefario>   and they're in on the whole thing
Sep 20 02:49:08 <nefario>   how do you know you are YOU?
Sep 20 02:49:19 <nefario>   etc.
Sep 20 02:49:34 <nefario>   I've got so much tinfoil on my head right now
Sep 20 02:49:41 <smickles>   nefario: well answer me this: have you verified that the earth is a sphereoid?
Sep 20 02:49:42 <nefario>   I can't even go near a microwave or mobile phone
Sep 20 02:49:52 <smickles>   i have
Sep 20 02:49:56 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [OBSI.HRPT] 2 @ 0.10274999 = 0.2055 BTC [-]
Sep 20 02:50:01 <smickles>   it was a fun project
Sep 20 02:50:12 <mircea_popescu>   it's a pity nefario doesn't have much time to waste on irc.

What a difference one week makes...

[Smoovious]

Do you at least agree that now there is no excuse for Nefario/GLBSE not returning to Goat amounts that are not in dispute?

I never made the claim that there was any excuse for not returning the coin, or that there even was a dispute, save for the claim that Goat hadn't sent an address to send them to.

Nefario did post a message on the forums at one point, that that was all he needed.

-- Smoov

[JoelKatz]

Do you at least agree that now there is no excuse for Nefario/GLBSE not returning to Goat amounts that are not in dispute?

I never made the claim that there was any excuse for not returning the coin, or that there even was a dispute, save for the claim that Goat hadn't sent an address to send them to.

That really doesn't answer my question.

Nefario did post a message on the forums at one point, that that was all he needed.

Okay, so then is this what happened:

1) Goat and Nefario talk in private.

2) Goat claims Nefario is holding his bitcoins hostage.

3) Nefario publicly claims that all he needs is a withdrawal address and he'll pay Goat back.

4) Goat publicly says to Nefario/GLBSE that if all he needs is a deposit address, here is one. Now pay me.

5) You claim this is evidence Goat was lying back at 2.

If Goat was telling the truth back at 2, isn't what he did in 4 exactly what you would expect -- calling Nefario's on his claim?

It is, by the way, entirely possible that Goat and Nefario simply came back from the discussions at the beginning with different impressions. Goat may genuinely have believed Nefario expected concessions for him to get the undisputed coins back and Nefario genuinely believed he had simply asked Goat to direct him how to repay him. Everything I've seen after that is consistent with this, and we do know that communications broke down at least to some extent.

[pyrkne]

It is, by the way, entirely possible that Goat and Nefario simply came back from the discussions at the beginning with different impressions. Goat may genuinely have believed Nefario expected concessions for him to get the undisputed coins back and Nefario believing he had simply asked Goat to direct him how to repay him. Everything I've seen after that is consistent with this, and we do know that communications broke down at least to some extent.

It seems like the lack of transparency / publicity on this issue is just going to exacerbate the communication problems.

Does GLBSE have a forum of its own or a blog? Is bitcointalk really the only announcement vehicle?

[Smoovious]

It is, by the way, entirely possible that Goat and Nefario simply came back from the discussions at the beginning with different impressions. Goat may genuinely have believed Nefario expected concessions for him to get the undisputed coins back and Nefario genuinely believed he had simply asked Goat to direct him how to repay him. Everything I've seen after that is consistent with this, and we do know that communications broke down at least to some extent.

Very possible. I'm not in a position to know the conversations or actions that have occurred outside the view of this forum or IRC. The actions taking place in private could be very very different, than has been presented here in public for all to see.

What I do see, is grandstanding.

I'm giving my impressions and thoughts based on what has been thrown out in public. Beginning with a dispute, which should never have been made a public spectacle of in the first place, which seems to be the event that brought about the eviction the next wave of grandstanding is about now.

How are parties supposed to work together when pretty much any chance taken is an opportunity to insult and threaten, diminishing whatever position either party has in the first place?

It is the grandstanding that seems to be the show the participants want us focused on and fighting over, not the actual events.

I get enough of this kind of crap in the political forums I participate on, and the same tactics are being employed right now, here.

Until new information comes out from either of the involved parties (and there hasn't been for about a week now), then we'll have more to talk about.

At this point it is all based on assumptions and conjecture. So many "facts" being thrown around that I have yet to see substantiation for, and a whole lot of inaction.

The way it looks to me, Goat gets the blame because he seems to be doing the most to incite a riot rather than actually work the problem. At least, in public, anyways.

-- Smoov

[pyrkne]

I agree with Smoov - that bitcointalk and particularly the Securities subforum needs less grandstanding. It is counter productive, and happens to be one of the few things that manages to annoy me over the web.

To play "devil's advocate" though - it seems there is a minimum amount of grandstanding required to get a response.

This community should probably learn to be more cooperative.

[JoelKatz]

The way it looks to me, Goat gets the blame because he seems to be doing the most to incite a riot rather than actually work the problem. At least, in public, anyways.

If Goat is unable to get GLBSE/Nefario to work with him in private, what else should he do? I am not saying that Goat's conduct has been a shining example of reason and patience, far from it. However, GLBSE's complete abandonment of its obligation to protect its customers' interest is, frankly, stunning to me. From where I'm sitting, it doesn't look like Nefario/GLBSE has lifted a finger to help those who held Goat's assets, their customers. This is a much bigger deal. (Although, it's entirely possible that GLBSE is trying hard to work with Goat in private and Goat is stonewalling. I don't know. I'm just trying to provide a fairer balance.)

GLBSE's position seem to be that as soon as they delist a stock, which they can do at any time for any reason, they have no obligation whatsoever to the holders of that stock. That despite the fact that they're the only entity that can communicate with them and there is no known way to redeem the assets without their cooperation. There also seem to be no controls on who can order a delisting and who decides how customers' interest will be protected. There is no evidence GLBSE/Nefario thought for even a second about the collateral damage a delisting would cause, and it appears that nobody did. This is completely unacceptable and goes way beyond the present issue with Goat.

[Smoovious]

The way it looks to me, Goat gets the blame because he seems to be doing the most to incite a riot rather than actually work the problem. At least, in public, anyways.

If Goat is unable to get GLBSE/Nefario to work with him in private, what else should he do? I am not saying that Goat's conduct has been a shining example of reason and patience, far from it. However, GLBSE's complete abandonment of its obligation to protect its customers' interest is, frankly, stunning to me. From where I'm sitting, it doesn't look like Nefario/GLBSE has lifted a finger to help those who held Goat's assets, their customers. This is a much bigger deal. (Although, it's entirely possible that GLBSE is trying hard to work with Goat in private and Goat is stonewalling. I don't know. I'm just trying to provide a fairer balance.)

GLBSE's position seem to be that as soon as they delist a stock, which they can do at any time for any reason, they have no obligation whatsoever to the holders of that stock. That despite the fact that they're the only entity that can communicate with them and there is no known way to redeem the assets without their cooperation. There also seem to be no controls on who can order a delisting and who decides how customers' interest will be protected. There is no evidence GLBSE/Nefario thought for even a second about the collateral damage a delisting would cause, and it appears that nobody did. This is completely unacceptable and goes way beyond the present issue with Goat.

and once again, you try and bring that topic back up to draw me into again, and my response hasn't changed since the last couple of times.

In my opinion, GLBSE has no such obligation to manage your assets for a listing that is no longer on the exchange.

GLBSE's obligation is to supply the 'company' a complete list of who has what shares, and since GLBSE was anonymous to begin with, claim ID's were used to avoid giving out account information that the users had been accustomed to be kept private.

The share-holders have enough information to link themselves up with the shares on the list, and can do so at any time.

In my opinion, users who are expecting GLBSE to continue handling their shares, including but not limited to, assisting them in getting them sold off so they can cash out, are expecting more than they have a right to expect from GLBSE at this point, since those shares are no longer listed on GLBSE.

My opinion on this isn't going to change, so lets retire that topic, ok?

-- Smoov

[reeses]

It is, by the way, entirely possible that Goat and Nefario simply came back from the discussions at the beginning with different impressions. Goat may genuinely have believed Nefario expected concessions for him to get the undisputed coins back and Nefario believing he had simply asked Goat to direct him how to repay him. Everything I've seen after that is consistent with this, and we do know that communications broke down at least to some extent.

It seems like the lack of transparency / publicity on this issue is just going to exacerbate the communication problems.

Does GLBSE have a forum of its own or a blog? Is bitcointalk really the only announcement vehicle?

They can barely maintain an exchange site as it is.  You expect a forum as well?

[MPOE-PR]

It is, by the way, entirely possible that Goat and Nefario simply came back from the discussions at the beginning with different impressions. Goat may genuinely have believed Nefario expected concessions for him to get the undisputed coins back and Nefario believing he had simply asked Goat to direct him how to repay him. Everything I've seen after that is consistent with this, and we do know that communications broke down at least to some extent.

It seems like the lack of transparency / publicity on this issue is just going to exacerbate the communication problems.

Does GLBSE have a forum of its own or a blog? Is bitcointalk really the only announcement vehicle?

They can barely maintain an exchange site as it is.  You expect a forum as well?

Think about how slow it would be....

[JoelKatz]

GLBSE's obligation is to supply the 'company' a complete list of who has what shares, and since GLBSE was anonymous to begin with, claim ID's were used to avoid giving out account information that the users had been accustomed to be kept private.

The share-holders have enough information to link themselves up with the shares on the list, and can do so at any time.

I thought we had already agreed that this was insufficient. Specifically:

1) It doesn't allow the issuer to contact the owners. This makes a two phase redeem impossible. There is no way other than a two phase redeem to avoid having to honor a claim code twice.

2) It gives the issuer no way to handle earnest claims that don't match the list of codes.

In my opinion, users who are expecting GLBSE to continue handling their shares, including but not limited to, assisting them in getting them sold off so they can cash out, are expecting more than they have a right to expect from GLBSE at this point, since those shares are no longer listed on GLBSE.

Didn't you agree that this was insufficient? What happens if an asset owner sends a claim code and the issuer says that claim code wasn't on the list? They claim the issuer is scamming. The issuer claims the code wasn't on the list. How can that possibly be resolved if GLBSE doesn't assist?

My opinion on this isn't going to change, so lets retire that topic, ok?

It seems it has just changed and you are back to the position I thought I had argued you out of.

[markm]

Well obviously the user can prove that GLBSE did give them that specific code, right? By showing that it is signed using GLBSE's private key?

But GLBSE maybe ought to have a signed by Goat list of codes Goat acknowleges having been given by GLBSE.

Each user should maybe have been given the hash of the list that was given to Goat as well as the signed by GLBSE code. Actually the message containing both would be signed in such a case presumably.

Goat is screwed though if the list he was given does not in fact hash to the hash GLBSE told the users it hashed to.

-MarkM-

[Smoovious]

GLBSE's obligation is to supply the 'company' a complete list of who has what shares, and since GLBSE was anonymous to begin with, claim ID's were used to avoid giving out account information that the users had been accustomed to be kept private.

The share-holders have enough information to link themselves up with the shares on the list, and can do so at any time.

I thought we had already agreed that this was insufficient. Specifically:

No, we didn't.

1) It doesn't allow the issuer to contact the owners. This makes a two phase redeem impossible. There is no way other than a two phase redeem to avoid having to honor a claim code twice.

The owners were given contact information of the issuer. That is the minimum needed. If GLBSE wasn't an anonymous-owner site, this wouldn't be an issue, but since it is, GLBSE is still obligated to protect the identity of its userbase. Ties between GLBSE and TYGRR have been terminated. It isn't GLBSE's responsibility to facilitate communication between issuer and shareholder, beyond giving the issuer's contact information.

2) It gives the issuer no way to handle earnest claims that don't match the list of codes.

If it doesn't match the list, it isn't a valid claim. Simple.

In my opinion, users who are expecting GLBSE to continue handling their shares, including but not limited to, assisting them in getting them sold off so they can cash out, are expecting more than they have a right to expect from GLBSE at this point, since those shares are no longer listed on GLBSE.

Didn't you agree that this was insufficient? What happens if an asset owner sends a claim code and the issuer says that claim code wasn't on the list? They claim the issuer is scamming. The issuer claims the code wasn't on the list. How can that possibly be resolved if GLBSE doesn't assist?

I said it could have been done better, sure, but just because it could have been done better, doesn't mean they are obligated to.

My opinion on this isn't going to change, so lets retire that topic, ok?

It seems it has just changed and you are back to the position I thought I had argued you out of.

I still hold the same position I did before.

We're dealing with different questions.

Could a better system have been implemented? Perhaps a condition to the TOS where if an asset is delisted, then the asset-holder's contact information would be disclosed to the issuer? Sure. There can always be improvement.

Is GLBSE obligated to do more than it has, and continue to facilitate getting shares sold off or traded, or handle any of the delisted company's accounting? No, I don't believe it is.

We all can certainly agree that Goat doesn't like the claim codes and all the work that he is going to have to do to get his shareholder list built up, and to deal with all of the trades and dividends himself, that he would have preferred some kind of encrypted list or other authentication, perhaps even a simple checksum instead of nothing.

That doesn't mean GLBSE was obligated to provide those things. GLBSE supplied the list of codes for when asset-holders contact Goat about their shares and dividends, etc.

I have heard of no reason to believe that list is fraudulent.

I have heard of no complaints that two people ended up having the same code.

As far as I'm concerned, while not ideal, it is definitely workable, and I know the more I antagonize Nefario, the less likely I would be able to expect him to answer queries about a discrepancy that might come up, but yet hasn't, in a timely manner.

I am curious to find out how much of Goat's shareholder list he has assembled so far. Even with his objections, he should still be working on that in the meantime.

-- Smoov