Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors.

[usagi]

usagi

Motion 80 seems to be relevent to this discussion.

could you please restore it.

I believe it is quoted on the forums but I do not have time to look it up as well as look up answers to all the other questions. I'll collect evidence as I can. I have companies to wind down. I'm sorry if you don't like that but it's the best I can do. I have to go to work now, so I really don't have time. I would have preferred to spend the morning winding down my companies. So you will have to wait.

[Deprived]

Re: [NYAN.B] Closing Annoucnement - Trade-in program
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.new#new

That trade-in program got abandoned (and rightly so).  There was a huge issue with it that never even got raised - and which is now irrelevant (so no harm actually done).  As that issue was just one of incompetence (not properly understanding how his own nyan structure worked) not scamming I don't think there's any point dwelling on it here (in brief, deleting nyan.b would screw nyan.a investors - by removing assets that were supposedly backing them without giving them any extra benefit in return.  It's part of the general nyan malaise - where it was badly defined and run so that no potential investors could ever properly assess risk/reward).

I'd ignore that proposal as it wasn't (imo) an attempt to scam, just badly conceived and never carried out (so no actual damage done).

[BCB]

Deprived.

I've deleted the posts regarding the trade-in program as they are not relevant there.


We are looking for a copy of Motion 80.  There is also a description of more usagi deception tactics on the locked thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1431991#msg1431991

[Deprived]

Deprived.

I've deleted the posts regarding the trade-in program as they are not relevant there.


We are looking for a copy of Motion 80.  There is also a description of more usagi deception tactics on the locked thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1431991#msg1431991

Your post says :

""Usagi was also doing some interesting things with motions, like transferring shares to himself to vote with so the motions go his way, then sending the shares back to treasury.  eskimobob and/or puppet caught usagi in that scheme, with help from stochastic website. Usagi also ran a couple polls on the deleted wordpress site and called those "motions".  Any real motion was always burried by an additional 4 or 5 motions (enough to push the important one out of history) with things like 'do you feel Usagi is leading CPA in a strong noble manner' etc etc.""

Not sure who you're quoting.

It's certainly true that on at least one motion there were more votes in favour than the total outstanding shares - I (and others) commented on it at the time.

There was a bug in GLBSE where when you voted it added your votes to the running total - but then never removed those votes if the shares changed hands.  I PMed nefario about it ages ago (like maybe July) but he never even acknowledged the PM.

I'm not aware of any proof that it was usagi actually doing it.  He's the most obvious culprit but I can't see nefario cooperating so there's no way to prove it: and it wouldn't be fair to conclude it was definitely usagi without such evidence.

Got no info on motions on the wordpress site (didn't look around it much other than at contracts and asset lists).  I do recall a fluff motion on GLBSE along the lines of 'I'm happy with the way usagi is running the company.' (not actually sure which company it was for).  That passed with a majority large enough that either usagi must have voted and/or there must have been significant occurrences of multiple-voting by the same shares.  Clearly a motion like that where the subject of the motion controls most of the shares and votes yes would be entirely meaningless - as all it demonstrates is that they have a high opinion of themself (which we didn't need a motion for - we already knew that).  As there was no action as a result of the poll (it was just meant to prove some point - what point I have no clue: anyone still holding shares was by definition not upset enough to sell at market prices) I can't really see it as scamming of any kind.  Misleading - maybe (as if taken at face value it would suggest overwhelming support - which MAY not have been the case) - but not sufficiently so (imo) to be worth worrying about.

[TECSHARE]

I wanted to bring attention to the fact that USAGI has once again shown himself to not only be dishonest, but willing to lie even further to cover up his past mistakes to the point of implicating himself with his self contradictions.

In this thread "Topic: Counter Evidence for the BCB thread": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134011.msg1427043#msg1427043
(which was promptly locked)

USAGI claims that I "DEFRAUDED" him. In order for me to have defrauded him he would have to have paid for something, ANYTHING. I was paid by Mathew M. Wright for work USAGI contracted, but later refused to pay for. Because of his own issues with his investments failing he felt he did not need to honor our contract, and later claimed it was spec work (it was not). Explained in detail with quotes here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=102798.0

Furthermore Mathew M. Wright never gave me instruction to release the files to you. He told you he did in a public thread but no such action was taken. As far as I am concerned if Mathew has a problem with it he can contact me. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CLAIM I SCAMMED YOU OUT OF ANYTHING - you didn't pay for a god damned thing, and these repeated counter accusations are not only extremely childish but quite transparent. Here is his counter accusation which is shockingly deleted.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=103045.0

In summation, stop making childish accusations to draw attention away from your own failures. I hope I don't have to read any more baseless accusations from you in the future.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

usagi had the intention of bringing his investors returns. I do not know if he has actual financial experience, (probably not), but he's hardly a scammer. He wasn't being fraudulent as a whole at the very least

if he has 5,000 BTC in BMF/NYAN/WTF he's not paying out, then he's a scammer

if he defaulted on loans, then he's a scammer

but he's not here to scam people.

[usagi]

Furthermore Mathew M. Wright never gave me instruction to release the files to you. He told you he did in a public thread but no such action was taken.

Common sense would indicate you should release the files to me. You have not. Third point - I don't care. I'm not pursuing a scammer tag against you for this, although I probably have a right to.

usagi had the intention of bringing his investors returns. I do not know if he has actual financial experience, (probably not), but he's hardly a scammer. He wasn't being fraudulent as a whole at the very least

if he has 5,000 BTC in BMF/NYAN/WTF he's not paying out, then he's a scammer

if he defaulted on loans, then he's a scammer

but he's not here to scam people.

I have repaid all of the CPA liquidity loans save one, which is being handled privately possibly by the sale of some of my personal possessions (A gibson guitar). As promised I will step up and fill in for those loans with my personal money. As it stands the loans were essentially a gift to CPA investors and I can prove that.

Secondly I am paying back all the investors by liquidating assets as expected and will vigorously pursue all our claims.

Finally I am in talks with people over a 350btc settlement package. Here's a quote from one of our largest shareholders whom I approached to discuss this settlement (the wording and amounts) before I went public with it: "Sometimes I guess  you have to do something that's not fair to keep your reputation."

I am not saying what I am doing is fair or not fair. I am saying it is what it is and I will do the right thing no matter what. Thank you for your comment TradeFortress.

[TECSHARE]

Furthermore Mathew M. Wright never gave me instruction to release the files to you. He told you he did in a public thread but no such action was taken.

Common sense would indicate you should release the files to me. You have not. Third point - I don't care. I'm not pursuing a scammer tag against you for this, although I probably have a right to.

Considering you not only broke our contract but you did not pay anything, what exactly gives you any rights?

[usagi]

Furthermore Mathew M. Wright never gave me instruction to release the files to you. He told you he did in a public thread but no such action was taken.

Common sense would indicate you should release the files to me. You have not. Third point - I don't care. I'm not pursuing a scammer tag against you for this, although I probably have a right to.

Considering you not only broke our contract but you did not pay anything, what exactly gives you any rights?

You were paid in full for work you promised to do, yet you did not complete the work you promised to do. If you really want I'll unlock the scam thread against you and you can go post there. Are you interested in reopening it?

[fbastage]

...the loans were essentially a gift...

uh oh. where have I heard this type of thing before?

[jcpham]

...the loans were essentially a gift...

uh oh. where have I heard this type of thing before?

lending dem coins is bad ju-ju

[TECSHARE]

Furthermore Mathew M. Wright never gave me instruction to release the files to you. He told you he did in a public thread but no such action was taken.

Common sense would indicate you should release the files to me. You have not. Third point - I don't care. I'm not pursuing a scammer tag against you for this, although I probably have a right to.

Considering you not only broke our contract but you did not pay anything, what exactly gives you any rights?

You were paid in full for work you promised to do, yet you did not complete the work you promised to do. If you really want I'll unlock the scam thread against you and you can go post there. Are you interested in reopening it?

Threats now? You are a big scary man. By the way you didn't answer the question. What gives you any right?

[usagi]

...the loans were essentially a gift...

uh oh. where have I heard this type of thing before?

The lending forum?

Where I got a loan and then paid it back?

Not sure what you're talking about BTW.

[BCB]

Lots of distraction here.

As usual

usai is to the scammer thread what satoshi dice is to the blockchain.



USAGI,

Can you please produce the full text to Motion ID: 80

Also GLBSE has released funds and documents from it site.

Have you received yours.

May of your links point to dead GLBSE pages.


Thank you.

[usagi]

Lots of distraction here.

As usual

usai is to the scammer thread what satoshi dice is to the blockchain.



USAGI,

Can you please produce the full text to Motion ID: 80

Also GLBSE has released funds and documents from it site.

Have you received yours.

May of your links point to dead GLBSE pages.


Thank you.

The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation to shift the accepted conclusion away from an oppositional opinion to one's own position.

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."[1]

He who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party. -wikipedia (emphasis mine)

Dear BCB;
I will make a response to the evidence you have presented in your locked thread when I have time. I'm busy with other things right now, like closing down my companies and making payments to shareholders. First payments go out tomorrow (friday) actually, as we've gotten paid by a number of companies. Hardware payments will go up soon too, since we were refunded from BFL for 2 jalapenos and a SC single so far.

[BCB]

Really usagi,

You don't have time to provide evidence that could support your claim of an unjust scam accusation.

Yet you have time to open a months old dispute about a case that no one cares about because you have NO credibility in this community and not one really cares anymore.

The only excuse could be that the evidence you refuse to provide must go to further prove your guilt.


 

[BCB]

Request for a moratorium on usagi posts until January 7th, 2013.

Usagi, at that time please report back on your developments with paying your investors back and winding down your companies.

Thank you.

[augustocroppo]

Now, the settlement. As you may or may not be aware, there are numerous scammer thread accusations against me. While I feel they are mostly trolls, I no longer wish to spend the rest of my life trying to answer the dozens of complaints against me. It just takes too much time, causes spam, and is not productive. I want to do the right thing, so I am asking for your help.

Here is my offer. I will:

a) return the 50 BTC I spent on Donator status to BMF,
b) pay 100 BTC of my own money to BMF investors,
c) pay 100 BTC of my own money to CPA investors,
d) and 100 BTC of my own money to NYAN.A/B/C investors (to be paid out first to make .A worth 1 per share, then .B, etc.)
e) donate 50% of my stake on all companies back to the company. This will mean your share of the company (and thus your value) increases. This is not an insignificant amount, I invested $10,000 of my personal money into my companies to try and make them work.

Whether you accept or reject this offer, I beg you -- please write a short note to me and BCB regarding your thoughts on:

a) whether or not you, as a shareholder, feel I deserve a scammer tag, and
b) whether or not you, as a shareholder, accept my offer of settlement as described above.

Usagi sent me a personal message showing an offer to settle any dispute that a shareholder could have with him.

My notes:

a) I do not think Usagi deserves a scammer tag. I have been watching Usagi before Pirateat40 defaulted. This campaign of false accusations against Usagi was initiated by users like Eskimobob, Puppet, Deprived, etc. Usagi only decided to protect his business (thus his shareholders) when he requested a scammer tag for the users casting aspersions over him. No accusation against Usagi has been proven true, beyond doubt. Hence such accusations became evident for an organized campaign to defame Usagi's business.

b) Since Usagi is not a scammer and not a fraudster, there is no reason for Usagi to offer such generous settlements to his shareholders. Instead, it is the false accusers who should be offering a settlement to repair all damaged caused by them to Usagi's shareholders. But that is not what is happening. Usagi has already requested that the accusers present any remedy to settle the dispute. The false accusers have still not offered any remedy. They have demonstrated that they are not interested in any settlement. They want what they always wanted: Usagi with a scammer tag. Whatever offer is made to settle this endless campaign of false accusations, that will be eventually ignored. A new accusation will pop up without any evidence and the whole fiasco will continue until Usagi receives a scammer tag. The only way to stop this campaign is to threaten the false accusers with a scammer tag. The false accusers have a free pass to falsely accuse Usagi (and any other business) as much as they want. There is no retaliation against them by the forum administration. Moreover, two moderators have already demonstrated a complete lack of fair judgment regarding this situation. Therefore, I think Usagi has no obligation to offer any settlement to his shareholders because it was not him who decided to destroy his business. The false accusers are the ones who should be penalized with a scammer tag if they do not offer a remedy to stop the false accusations.

[nameface]

I held 10 shares of usagi's BMF on GLBSE at the time of the shutdown and have never been reimbursed. I contacted usagi directly. He said:

"..no problem, but it's important to tell me if you've placed a claim via glbse or not, and if so what that address was. I have all the lists, and I'm in the process of counting up what we have and beginning distributing assets now.."

I let him know that I had already processed my claim. After receiving no word from usagi I contacted him again and he said that he didn't have my wallet on record and refused to pay me.

The main reason I'm posting this is so people new to bitcoin can have a better chance of avoiding usagi. I see many scam accusations for usagi and I feel it reflects very badly on bitcointalk.org to have someone like this promoting themselves freely.

I am owed 1 BTC from usagi, and I just wanted to make it public for posterity. I held 9 different assets on GLBSE and usagi is the only asset issuer that refuses to pay me that I also see masquerading around bitcointalk pretending to be legitimate.

[usagi]

I held 10 shares of usagi's BMF on GLBSE at the time of the shutdown and have never been reimbursed. I contacted usagi directly. He said:

"..no problem, but it's important to tell me if you've placed a claim via glbse or not, and if so what that address was. I have all the lists, and I'm in the process of counting up what we have and beginning distributing assets now.."

I let him know that I had already processed my claim. After receiving no word from usagi I contacted him again and he said that he didn't have my wallet on record and refused to pay me.

The main reason I'm posting this is so people new to bitcoin can have a better chance of avoiding usagi. I see many scam accusations for usagi and I feel it reflects very badly on bitcointalk.org to have someone like this promoting themselves freely.

I am owed 1 BTC from usagi, and I just wanted to make it public for posterity. I held 9 different assets on GLBSE and usagi is the only asset issuer that refuses to pay me that I also see masquerading around bitcointalk pretending to be legitimate.

Either you're outright lying, or you've made a terrible mistake. Don't worry, this will be easy to show one way or another.

Just post your claim e-mail and we can determine if you were on the list that was forwarded to burnside. Then we can confirm whether or not you:

a) made a mistake and lost your e-mail
b) made a mistake and are not a shareholder

Those are the only two ways out of this for you. In either case I expect an apology. We don't need anymore drive by sockpuppets like deeplink and capn noe.

Oh, and in case you missed the post right above yours when you necro'd this thread:
quote author=augustocroppo link=topic=113708.msg1434449#msg1434449 date=1357317432]
Usagi sent me a personal message showing an offer to settle any dispute that a shareholder could have with him.

My notes:

a) I do not think Usagi deserves a scammer tag. I have been watching Usagi before Pirateat40 defaulted. This campaign of false accusations against Usagi was initiated by users like Eskimobob, Puppet, Deprived, etc. Usagi only decided to protect his business (thus his shareholders) when he requested a scammer tag for the users casting aspersions over him. No accusation against Usagi has been proven true, beyond doubt. Hence such accusations became evident for an organized campaign to defame Usagi's business.

b) Since Usagi is not a scammer and not a fraudster, there is no reason for Usagi to offer such generous settlements to his shareholders. Instead, it is the false accusers who should be offering a settlement to repair all damaged caused by them to Usagi's shareholders. But that is not what is happening. Usagi has already requested that the accusers present any remedy to settle the dispute. The false accusers have still not offered any remedy. They have demonstrated that they are not interested in any settlement. They want what they always wanted: Usagi with a scammer tag. Whatever offer is made to settle this endless campaign of false accusations, that will be eventually ignored. A new accusation will pop up without any evidence and the whole fiasco will continue until Usagi receives a scammer tag. The only way to stop this campaign is to threaten the false accusers with a scammer tag. The false accusers have a free pass to falsely accuse Usagi (and any other business) as much as they want. There is no retaliation against them by the forum administration. Moreover, two moderators have already demonstrated a complete lack of fair judgment regarding this situation. Therefore, I think Usagi has no obligation to offer any settlement to his shareholders because it was not him who decided to destroy his business. The false accusers are the ones who should be penalized with a scammer tag if they do not offer a remedy to stop the false accusations.
[/quote]