Nefario

[Atlas]

Thanks for trying, Theymos.

[wachtwoord]

What would I do with the money if I kept it? I don't have the user database.

When Goat's assets were kicked off the exchange he received a list of all holders of his assets encoded. All the holders received a code to prove they owned the asset. If the same is done now for the balances (and I read somewhere that it will, no idea about the source though) then you could return all the funds using this information.

Disclaimer: I have no funds, assets or anything of any value on GLBSE

[kmettke]

It seems that the main issue on crypto currencies and their spreading around the world is that many not trustworthy people are seeking their chances to pull out some cash for themselves, which crashes the main trust in this technology. Building Trust should be key issue on spreading cryptocoins. Because this is one of the most important issue all currencies have... the more trusted they are, the more value they become/have., or maybe more more truthful: the less trust, the less value in midterm a currency will have.

sadly many bigger players on the cryptocoin market did not understand that yet, or dont care about.

[Mushoz]

When were you planning on disclosing this aspect of your role in relation to the sale of your stake in GLBSE?

I mentioned it briefly in my sale thread. And I've mentioned it before in other places.

Theymos, as treasurer, shouldn't you be the one to disperse the funds to their rightful owners?  Why would you be sending the funds to Nefario in the first place, even if you had no knowledge of his treachery?

I don't have the user database.

Nefario has defrauded me and others in several different ways and deserves a scammer tag.

- He has stated that he would ignore any motion to remove him as CEO.

One thing I constantly warn people about is self-censorship. If you think it is a good thing to remove Nefario as CEO, then put up a motion, and let him ignore it and take responsibility for this. By not putting up a motion because "he would ignore it", you are simply letting him go on as CEO.

Please do not censor yourself, and do what you think is right for GLBSE regardless of what you think Nefario might do then. That could protect you in the future.

(disclaimer: I don't have any coin or share on GLBSE)

Theymos, please read this post. I also urge you not to give any BTC to Nefario. Thanks.

I tried to remove him as CEO, but there wasn't enough shareholder support. 5-6 people supported removing him against three (including Nefario) who didn't, but our side didn't have enough shares for a motion. Three large shareholders weren't at the meeting, so it was difficult to get the 51% required.

Later on in the meeting, Nefario somehow managed to convince 1-2 of the people who had supported removing Nefario, which is how he was able to pass a motion to order me to give him the treasury funds. So I doubt a motion to remove Nefario is possible now even if the absent shareholders voted.

It doesn't matter anyway, since Nefario said that he would ignore the shareholders and shut down GLBSE. And shutting down GLBSE is against the bylaws, so he needs a 66% vote. He didn't even pursue a 50% vote.

What would I do with the money if I kept it? I don't have the user database.

Damn, thanks for trying though! This really sounds bad. I hope I'll get my money back from GLBSE. I knew I should have withdrawn...
Easy in a hindsight :p

[k3t3r]

@Theymos, you seem to be the only one here from the meeting who can give a straight answer

I tried to remove him as CEO, but there wasn't enough shareholder support. 5-6 people supported removing him against three (including Nefario) who didn't, but our side didn't have enough shares for a motion. Three large shareholders weren't at the meeting, so it was difficult to get the 51% required.

Later on in the meeting, Nefario somehow managed to convince 1-2 of the people who had supported removing Nefario, which is how he was able to pass a motion to order me to give him the treasury funds. So I doubt a motion to remove Nefario is possible now even if the absent shareholders voted.

It doesn't matter anyway, since Nefario said that he would ignore the shareholders and shut down GLBSE. And shutting down GLBSE is against the bylaws, so he needs a 66% vote. He didn't even pursue a 50% vote.

What would I do with the money if I kept it? I don't have the user database.

what was nefario's reasoning for closing GLBSE?

He managed to convince some of you to support him, so he must have had a good argument, what was it?

[Puppet]

GLBSE should have been a black market operation, no offense. The fact that the founder is known and visible and that the exchange is centralized is a big red flag.

Agreed. I always argued that GLBSE should be an unregulated platform for trades.

You mean, illegal?

[bitcool]

I for one have a lot of sympathy toward Nefario, there have been missteps but what he (and other shareholders) were trying to accomplish was out of this world.

And he deserves some support from the community.

[jasinlee]

I for one have a lot of sympathy toward Nefario, there have been missteps but what he (and other shareholders) were trying to accomplish was out of this world.

And he deserves some support from the community.

I do not think so, he deserves to be doxed and haunted for the rest of the time he uses the internet by the online mob.

[elux]

Today we learned that the bus factor of GLBSE was in fact 1.

Despite Nefario's claim to the contrary.*, **, ***

This raises the question: What is the bus factor of Bitcointalk?

Losing GLBSE was a bummer, losing Bitcointalk would be a calamity.

Does Gox / Tibanne Ltd. have everything they need to keep things running?

(If, for example, the law should come a knocking, or Theymos should be unavailable for some other reason.)


*) IIRC, Nefario stated this in his recent Bitcoin 2012 talk in London.

**) Update 1: Oops. After quickly skipping through the talk, it seems I was wrong about Nefario having made this claim.
He dodged the question when it came up, and only spoke of moving the servers to different jurisdictions if something should happen.

***) Update 2: Disregard last update.

Please tell me the GLBSE makes multiple off site backups, somewhat frequently.

I know you are working toward going "legit", but worst case and they decide to gank the domain and hit the host, GLBSE will just pop up elsewhere right?

Many would be interested considering the counter party risk involved. You have the only ledger of members in an offering and the holdings of each.
Without you, issuers would have absolutely no way of honouring their commitments.

Yes we've got frequent offsite backups, you've need to read our threads on our disaster plans, from government action to me being hit by a bus.

[YoYa]

Things that make you go hmm....

Seriously tho, it's awesome that people around here have such faith but we return to the maxim of not risking what you're not willing to lose. Add to that, that bitcoin in itself is a risky proposition which means that investing in bitcoin derivatives compounds the risk again.....people are here bemoaning bitcoins bad luck when the financial instruments to begin with have worse odds then loaning money out on trust alone to random strangers.

Never invest what you're not willing to lose, and especially do not invest in that which you don't understand.

But that said, it sucks, and should I ever be here holding the bag myself, I'm sure I too would be happy to hear words of support, so keep on pushing, the spirit of innovation includes resilience when burned.

[Deafboy]

losing Bitcointalk would be a calamity.

My advise is to setup Osiris serverless portal and figure out how to replicate content of the forum there. If something bad happen, we can continue there.

[keystroke]

losing Bitcointalk would be a calamity.

My advise is to setup Osiris serverless portal and figure out how to replicate content of the forum there. If something bad happen, we can continue there.

Every week the DB should be dumped, stripped of personally identifying info (PWs, emails), and sent out on a bittorrent That would help...

[bitcool]

losing Bitcointalk would be a calamity.

My advise is to setup Osiris serverless portal and figure out how to replicate content of the forum there. If something bad happen, we can continue there.

Bitcointalk getting subpoenaed is the next logical step as far as this GLBSE and Pirate things go.  IMO.

[keystroke]

losing Bitcointalk would be a calamity.

My advise is to setup Osiris serverless portal and figure out how to replicate content of the forum there. If something bad happen, we can continue there.

Bitcointalk getting subpoenaed is the next logical step as far as this GLBSE and Pirate things go.  IMO.

Makes sense. At the minimum they'll want it for forensics to get IPs (which probably won't be there) and whatnot...

[Arto]

Yes he said this.

Out of curiosity, did you or any of the other shareholders happen to make a recording of the shareholder meeting?

[BadBear]

Nefario has defrauded me and others in several different ways and deserves a scammer tag.
- The BitcoinGlobal bylaws state that BitcoinGlobal's purpose is to operate GLBSE. By shutting down GLBSE without amending the bylaws, Nefario has violated the bylaws.
- He has stated that he would ignore any motion to remove him as CEO.
- He is knowingly making BitcoinGlobal shares worthless, violating his fiduciary duty.
- He is refusing to release my GLBSE balance without my ID, which I did not agree to.

Theymos has backed up all of these with evidence, and I'm satisfied the burden of proof has been met, even for the last point, which I didn't initially buy (MtGox anyone?).

However, if Nefario is being compelled to do these things under threat of force (govt), should he still be given the scammer tag? Normally the burden of proof would be on him to prove he's under duress, but what if he's not allowed to, again under threat of force? That was one of my first concerns with the situation with Nefario/Goat, and it still is now.

Laws and regulations are a pain, and make things a lot more complicated than they need to be.

[jasinlee]

Nefario has defrauded me and others in several different ways and deserves a scammer tag.
- The BitcoinGlobal bylaws state that BitcoinGlobal's purpose is to operate GLBSE. By shutting down GLBSE without amending the bylaws, Nefario has violated the bylaws.
- He has stated that he would ignore any motion to remove him as CEO.
- He is knowingly making BitcoinGlobal shares worthless, violating his fiduciary duty.
- He is refusing to release my GLBSE balance without my ID, which I did not agree to.

Theymos has backed up all of these with evidence, and I'm satisfied the burden of proof has been met, even for the last point, which I didn't initially buy (MtGox anyone?).

However, if Nefario is being compelled to do these things under threat of force (govt), should he still be given the scammer tag? Normally the burden of proof would be on him to prove he's under duress, but what if he's not allowed to, again under threat of force? That was one of my first concerns with the situation with Nefario/Goat, and it still is now.

Laws and regulations are a pain, and make things a lot more complicated than they need to be.

Glad your keeping us all in check badbear, better to have this looked at rationally then its not questioned later.

[wuala]

Nefario was a family man. He has a wife. Possibly kids.

Him chickening out in the face of the government is expected. We should of known.

Nefario is a saint...
I know he just earned many BTCBTCBTC by the glory god!!

Let´s loan your money to a toilet...

[hazek]

Nefario has defrauded me and others in several different ways and deserves a scammer tag.
- The BitcoinGlobal bylaws state that BitcoinGlobal's purpose is to operate GLBSE. By shutting down GLBSE without amending the bylaws, Nefario has violated the bylaws.
- He has stated that he would ignore any motion to remove him as CEO.
- He is knowingly making BitcoinGlobal shares worthless, violating his fiduciary duty.
- He is refusing to release my GLBSE balance without my ID, which I did not agree to.

Theymos has backed up all of these with evidence, and I'm satisfied the burden of proof has been met, even for the last point, which I didn't initially buy (MtGox anyone?).

However, if Nefario is being compelled to do these things under threat of force (govt), should he still be given the scammer tag? Normally the burden of proof would be on him to prove he's under duress, but what if he's not allowed to, again under threat of force? That was one of my first concerns with the situation with Nefario/Goat, and it still is now.

Laws and regulations are a pain, and make things a lot more complicated than they need to be.

Given that he has no problem to use that same threat of force to compel his users to follow his rules I would say that even if he is under duress it isn't an excuse in his case.

Evidence:

I can't believe how hypocritical this sort of action is Nefario. Well I guess it depends on what you believe because I am not really sure about your beliefs, but if you are a proponent of a peaceful prosperous society that governs itself without a small gang of thugs that enforces their arbitrary rules through violence, I just can't understand how you want to have a business that doesn't follow their rules and yet use their violence to for your own personal egandas.

There's a peaceful way to solve this problem.

Whoa whoa whoa there, what are you talking about violence for.

Alberto agreed to have this information published if he scammed shareholders or ran off with their BTC.

The publishing of it has two purposes,
1) to prevent him from being able to do it again as everyone knows who he is(he can't re-invent himself),
2) to make it easier for us to find him and prosecute him, for fraud.

The rest of your post doesn't make much sense.

Oh I'm sorry, I assumed by prosecution you meant use police and the justice system i.e. the small group of thugs that enforce their rules through violence i.e. the government's aparatus to hunt the man down, kidnap him and imprison him i.e. use violence to punish him.

Did you have something else in mind with "prosecution"?

I did, what I meant was I was going to go there and lick him until he gives back the bitcoins.

I'll take that as me correctly assuming what you had in mind. So do you support the government then in general and are following all their rules with GLBSE? Paying taxes? ect?

[Justin00]

However, if Nefario is being compelled to do these things under threat of force (govt), should he still be given the scammer tag? Normally the burden of proof would be on him to prove he's under duress, but what if he's not allowed to, again under threat of force? That was one of my first concerns with the situation with Nefario/Goat, and it still is now.

now every scammer is going to be saying this....(well not saying anything... but hinting at legal issues)