TYGRR.* assets on GLBSE delisted.

[JoelKatz]

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

I believe your position is blatantly unreasonable and I would be shocked if GLBSE took this position. This leaves GLBSE's customers with no recourse whatsoever if Goat says, "Sorry, that code wasn't on the list I got from GLBSE." I cannot believe GLBSE would construe their agreement with their customers as allowing them to do that. But if it surfaces that they share your position, I will begin recommending to everyone who will listen that they refuse to do business with GLBSE since GLBSE seems to be shirking their primary obligation -- to secure their customers' ownership interest in the assets they purchase. I would consider GLBSE taking this position reneging on their agreement with their customers.

[Smoovious]

The last message he sent out on this as far as I could tell was him advising people to report me to the police. I wonder if GLBSE will assist with that as they are the only ones with "evidence" (maybe now deleted?).

I don't recall ever seeing a message telling people to report you to the police. Link plz?

-- Smoov

[Smoovious]

I believe your position is blatantly unreasonable and I would be shocked if GLBSE took this position. This leaves GLBSE's customers with no recourse whatsoever if Goat says, "Sorry, that code wasn't on the list I got from GLBSE." I cannot believe GLBSE would construe their agreement with their customers as allowing them to do that. But if it surfaces that they share your position, I will begin recommending to everyone who will listen that they refuse to do business with GLBSE since GLBSE seems to be shirking their primary obligation -- to secure their customers' ownership interest in the assets they purchase. I would consider GLBSE taking this position reneging on their agreement with their customers.

Please post a copy of this agreement that you keep referring to?

-- Smoov

[JoelKatz]

Please post a copy of this agreement that you keep referring to?

You have just exhausted my ability to presume you are arguing in good faith. Have a nice day.

[Smoovious]

The last message he sent out on this as far as I could tell was him advising people to report me to the police. I wonder if GLBSE will assist with that as they are the only ones with "evidence" (maybe now deleted?).

I don't recall ever seeing a message telling people to report you to the police. Link plz?

-- Smoov

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112551.msg1224851#msg1224851


I guess he says "group legal action" in the GLBSE support e-mail but he said police to others. Still more or less the same thing. He expects his customers to either report me to the police or sue me. There is no way they could do that with out the help of GLBSE who claims they are no longer involved.

...if you don't honor the agreement/contract between you and your shareholders.

The interpretation that you included afterwards seems to ignore that caveat.

Taken in its entirety, it is reasonable advice to give.

-- Smoov

[Bitcoin Oz]

I have had about 10 people contact me about the issue. I am not started collecting data from them as I do not think this system is workable in it's current form. However these 10 people are about 1% of the total if the data from GLBSE can be trusted.

I also at this time do not have a response from Nefario or the BTC returned. It will be interesting to see if he will return the coin now that he knows I will not accept his terms or let him flee from his responsibility. It will also be intersting to understand why he did this in the first place.

The last message he sent out on this as far as I could tell was him advising people to report me to the police. I wonder if GLBSE will assist with that as they are the only ones with "evidence" (maybe now deleted?).

Thanks.

You should be able to collect enough data to see if any competing codes show up.

[memvola]

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

Of course. And I have no obligation to do business with a company which doesn't strive to do what's best for their customers. And that's the only point. When I say I'm entitled to an explanation, that doesn't mean I have a written contract with GLBSE saying so. It means I can't reason about their competence in running the business I desire to work with, if they don't provide a reasonable explanation. If Nefario gave the same defense as you did, GLBSE would lose half its customers in a month.

If you can explain to me how asking Nefario to have a communication channel will solve this issue I will do it. However at this time that seems to only be one of the many issue we have to deal with.

It seems to me that this would let you verify the claims presented to you. In effect, it would be as if GLBSE was still acting as the broker (minus the management effort) but not the exchange. You can then slowly move the security to a different exchange. If you must, ask for a fee from your customers to do this.

[MPOE-PR]

If Nefario gave the same defense as you did, GLBSE would lose half its customers in a month.

That month was September.

[Bastone]

I have had about 10 people contact me about the issue. I am not started collecting data from them as I do not think this system is workable in it's current form. However these 10 people are about 1% of the total if the data from GLBSE can be trusted.

I wonder how long it will take for asset issuers start requesting to be delisted.  If only 1 percent of the shareholders use the claim codes, the asset issuers can legitimately state that they honored every claim code presented to them and profit handsomely by the delisting.   

[Bastone]

Correct me if I am wrong, but is GLBSE violating every shareholders privacy by requiring that they reveal themselves to the delisted asset issuer to regain control of their shares?  Isn't this illegal?

[markm]

He will likely claim that it is the privacy laws that prevent him telling Goat himself everyone's contact information.

He wants to leave it to them to choose to reveal it to Goat or not or maybe even whether to employ a cut-out to represent them who will like GLBSE not reveal their contact info to Goat.

-MarkM-

[pyrkne]

If Nefario gave the same defense as you did, GLBSE would lose half its customers in a month.

That month was September.

Is that why the site has been so fast lately? Or coincidence?

[JoelKatz]

He wants to leave it to them to choose to reveal it to Goat or not or maybe even whether to employ a cut-out to represent them who will like GLBSE not reveal their contact info to Goat.

But their claim code scheme makes using a cut out almost impossible. If someone uses a cut out, what happens if the cut out tells them that Goat said the claim code was already used? If the idea of the claim code scheme was to facilitate using a cut out, it's even more poorly designed than I thought.

[markm]

Maybe Tormail with Tor would work as a cutout if sentient cutouts are, as they could well be, untrustworthy?

-MarkM-

[JoelKatz]

Maybe Tormail with Tor would work as a cutout if sentient cutouts are, as they could well be, untrustworthy?

That's probably a better idea. However, to make that work, people would have to know a key to encrypt messages to Goat with and would need a contact address at Tormail. This scheme could have been made to work, but it would have required a process like the following:

1) GLBSE suspends trading and deletes orders on Goat's assets. GLBSE gives its customers who hold Goat assets a message saying that the stocks are in the process of being delisted by GLBSE, that trading is suspended, and that a claim process will be offered as soon as possible.

2) GLBSE and Goat work out a redemption plan. They decide if there's a fixed timeframe for claims, who will handle the claims, how they will be sent, and so on.

3) GLBSE forwards to asset owners a letter from Goat documenting the agreed redemption plan.

That it does not seem GLBSE even attempted this is a *big* problem. That GLBSE doesn't have a policy on how delisting will proceed is a *big* problem. That GLBSE appears to completely disregard its obligation to secure its customers' ownership interests in their assets is a stunning problem.

This is, of course, assuming that they didn't attempt to work out a delisting agreement with Goat. We haven't heard GLBSE's side yet really. But they better say something soon, because it looks *really* bad. Goat has already publicly stated that he has no problem with them issuing a statement. But it's possible they have information they can't share with us that might change this view. But GLBSE, heads up, this is a serious PR problem. You need to do something about it.

[guruvan]

He will likely claim that it is the privacy laws that prevent him telling Goat himself everyone's contact information.

He wants to leave it to them to choose to reveal it to Goat or not or maybe even whether to employ a cut-out to represent them who will like GLBSE not reveal their contact info to Goat.

-MarkM-

Honestly I am wondering if I can / should collect that data :/

I'm quite sure that most registered securities (at least, and at least in the US) require, for example, the company to keep a list of registered shareholders, and their contact information, so that they can be paid dividends, and be sent info/invites to shareholders' meetings. I can't say what a bond issuer might be required to do.

However, the claimcode is a terribly conceived plan......has the look of Patrick Strateman all over it. Yeah....that one went well...let's try it with a little twist this time, eh? No thanks. I'm not taking my chances with any more assets. I have a couple hundred more shares of SS to unload & all I have are delisted assets. I will not be getting anymore assets delisted out from under my trading position. ugh. let the next wave of scams begin.

Yeah. wouldn't surprise me that's why the GLBSE site is so fast. meh. Be curious for a blockchain forensics expert to see if they can spot a real withdrawal run.

[piotr_n]

All TYGRR assets have been moved off GLBSE (delisted)

Hehe.
Of course, it's all because The Goat has done nothing wrong - right?

So now you have chosen to cover up your ass, instead of getting paid for being his lying bitch?
Sounds like quite some desperation... But I am afraid it won't help you much - you will still end up in jail so better start buying some lubricants...
A pretty boy like you, with such a big experience of being a bitch - it will be a great gift for your new mates

[burnside]

He will likely claim that it is the privacy laws that prevent him telling Goat himself everyone's contact information.

He wants to leave it to them to choose to reveal it to Goat or not or maybe even whether to employ a cut-out to represent them who will like GLBSE not reveal their contact info to Goat.

-MarkM-

Honestly I am wondering if I can / should collect that data :/

I'm quite sure that most registered securities (at least, and at least in the US) require, for example, the company to keep a list of registered shareholders, and their contact information, so that they can be paid dividends, and be sent info/invites to shareholders' meetings. I can't say what a bond issuer might be required to do.

However, the claimcode is a terribly conceived plan......has the look of Patrick Strateman all over it. Yeah....that one went well...let's try it with a little twist this time, eh? No thanks. I'm not taking my chances with any more assets. I have a couple hundred more shares of SS to unload & all I have are delisted assets. I will not be getting anymore assets delisted out from under my trading position. ugh. let the next wave of scams begin.

Yeah. wouldn't surprise me that's why the GLBSE site is so fast. meh. Be curious for a blockchain forensics expert to see if they can spot a real withdrawal run.

On LTC-GLOBAL all asset issuers can see the email addresses and number of shares for all their shareholders.  No vendor lock-in.  I don't understand why GLBSE has such a problem wrapping their brains around this.  An email address is not exactly a sensitive piece of information.

And yeah, is it just me or has just about everything tanked on GLBSE.  I set all my asks, come back a day later and cut 'em in half, come back a day later, cut 'em again.  Still no takers.  I think how Nefario handled this just cost us all a small fortune.   

[pyrkne]

And yeah, is it just me or has just about everything tanked on GLBSE.  I set all my asks, come back a day later and cut 'em in half, come back a day later, cut 'em again.  Still no takers.  I think how Nefario handled this just cost us all a small fortune.

The fact that this even might be true says a lot about the importance of confidence in one's exchange. When are we going to hear from GLBSE PR?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Another reason why you should NOT trust GLBSE.