|
Monster Tent
|
 |
November 24, 2012, 11:26:41 AM |
|
You just don't get it.
I hear they're taking auditions for peewee herman 3. They need someone to play an overweight argumentative looser that lives with his parents and likes to argue like a 3 year old cuz Mark Holton is too old now. In this particular case he is spot on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This isn't the kind of software where we can leave so many unresolved bugs that we need a tracker for them." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
meowmeowbrowncow
|
|
November 24, 2012, 11:43:24 AM |
|
The problem when the issuer does not maintain their pseudonymity.
Feels insecure and lawyers up. The liability is def on the part of the issuer.
This is not acceptable with contracts written under pseudonymity. What we are seeing is what happens when the issuer fails to maintain the integrity of their pseudonymous contract. Negligence?
|
"Bitcoin has been an amazing ride, but the most fascinating part to me is the seemingly universal tendency of libertarians to immediately become authoritarians the very moment they are given any measure of power to silence the dissent of others." - The Bible
|
|
|
|
Deprived
|
|
November 24, 2012, 11:55:57 AM |
|
You just don't get it.
I hear they're taking auditions for peewee herman 3. They need someone to play an overweight argumentative looser that lives with his parents and likes to argue like a 3 year old cuz Mark Holton is too old now.You did well pointing out some facts on this Gigamining case. Now stop polluting the forum and let the mods do their job. Right - that post of yours had way more useful/valuable content than any of mine? Would suggest you use different translation software - whatever you're using now seems to mistranslate something that should come out as "Sorry - I was totally wrong" into "Go away you're a troll [Insert random insult]". |
|
|
|
|
|
MPOE-PR
|
|
November 24, 2012, 03:01:40 PM |
|
The problem when the issuer does not maintain their pseudonymity.
Feels insecure and lawyers up. The liability is def on the part of the issuer.
This is not acceptable with contracts written under pseudonymity. What we are seeing is what happens when the issuer fails to maintain the integrity of their pseudonymous contract. Negligence?
Probably the one correct summation. |
|
|
|
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1127
|
|
November 24, 2012, 05:42:20 PM
Last edit: November 24, 2012, 07:20:20 PM by BadBear |
|
I do understand the arguments about not giving the scammer tag because of being under legal pressure, however I think some are viewing the scammer tag the wrong way. The scammer tag is not "You need to do this even though it may or may not be illegal". It's not about about dealing justice, or punishing people, or forcing people to do anything. The scammer tag is "He made x agreement, he can't or won't keep it". It's a warning about those who make promises they can't keep, and there's a lot of those around here.
IMO a scammer tag pretty clearly fits the situation, on the other hand he's a longstanding member (year and a half), has fairly good rep, and this is his first and only real incident. Have there been other incidents? Does he have any other investments?
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
November 24, 2012, 05:45:44 PM |
|
The scammer tag is "He made x agreement, he can't or won't keep it". It's a warning about those who make promises they can't keep, and there's a lot of those around here.
Exactly. BTW the legal constraints are just fluff to legalize the stealing of lots of bonds IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
|
MPOE-PR
|
|
November 24, 2012, 07:45:34 PM |
|
I do understand the arguments about not giving the scammer tag because of being under legal pressure, however I think some are viewing the scammer tag the wrong way. The scammer tag is not "You need to do this even though it may or may not be illegal". It's not about about dealing justice, or punishing people, or forcing people to do anything. The scammer tag is "He made x agreement, he can't or won't keep it". It's a warning about those who make promises they can't keep, and there's a lot of those around here.
IMO a scammer tag pretty clearly fits the situation, on the other hand he's a longstanding member (year and a half), has fairly good rep, and this is his first and only real incident. Have there been other incidents? Does he have any other investments?
On the other hand giving a scammer tag to the one person that went into their own pocket to hire lawyers to try and sort out Nefario's mess (and in the process forced Nefario to give out those lists, because I don't think it would have happened otherwise) seems...perverse. Maybe it's just me. |
|
|
|
|
DannyM
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:11:47 PM |
|
Before giga gets the scammer tag, you would need to give the scammer tag to every other glbse asset issuer, because they did not fulfill the terms of the contract, where giga went to great expense and put himself at great risk to find a way he could continue to pay people, when the easier way would have been to do nothing just like every other asset issuer has done so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monster Tent
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:19:11 PM |
|
Its telling that Giga hasnt responded to the allegations.
He really needs to state his case.
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:28:06 PM |
|
Before giga gets the scammer tag, you would need to give the scammer tag to every other glbse asset issuer, because they did not fulfill the terms of the contract, where giga went to great expense and put himself at great risk to find a way he could continue to pay people, when the easier way would have been to do nothing just like every other asset issuer has done so far.
Yes, I expect an inflation of scammers tags soon. But spare me your delusions about Giga's integrity. He's openly looking for a way to make as difficult as possible for his investors to get paid. |
|
|
|
|
|
DannyM
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:32:57 PM |
|
Yes, I expect an inflation of scammers tags soon. But spare me your delusions about Giga's integrity. He's openly looking for a way to make as difficult as possible for his investors to get paid.
If that were the case it would have been much easier to do nothing than to hire a lawyer to express to nefario several times on the record that if he didn't send the lists there would be consequences. If giga wanted to make it difficult for investors to get paid he wouldn't have done this, and it would have been near impossible for investors in any other glbse asset to get paid either. |
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:36:53 PM |
|
He's openly looking for a way to make as difficult as possible for his investors to get paid.
If that were the case it would have been much easier to do nothing than to hire a lawyer The difference is that he is not anonymous, and that in this way he can steal legally (or quasi-legally). See the light? |
|
|
|
|
|
DannyM
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:39:12 PM |
|
Yes, I expect an inflation of scammers tags soon. But spare me your delusions about Giga's integrity. He's openly looking for a way to make as difficult as possible for his investors to get paid.
If that were the case it would have been much easier to do nothing than to hire a lawyer The difference is that he is not anonymous, and that in this way he can steal legally (or quasi-legally). See the light? No. If he had not been the one to legally pressure nefario into providing the lists, it wouldn't have mattered one bit that he is not anonymous, it is impossible to pay people if you don't have those lists. By the way, nefario has admitted the lists are even incomplete. |
|
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:45:05 PM |
|
He has already all the info needed to pay his investors. If the lists are incomplete, he can start paying who is already in the list. There is no freaking need of any invented legal bullshit.
|
|
|
|
|
jamesg
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1000
AKA: gigavps
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:49:56 PM |
|
To the bitcoin community:
We are all in the very unenviable position of riding in the wake of the aftermath of James McCarthy. I have been placed in a very bad spot in this wake, and my only goal is to protect and serve Gigaminers as I have over the last half year.
I would like to point out that I am the only asset issuer on GLBSE, as far as I am aware, who is trying to move forward and abide by all the laws of local, state, federal and international law. I am the only asset issuer, as far as I am aware, to hire legal counsel and to send via certified mail, a demand letter to James McCarthy after multiple unanswered emails and phone calls. I am fairly confident that the asset lists only started arriving once the letter was received.
Further more, how exactly would you like me to handle situations where claims are made against gigamining that are not in the list provided from GLBSE? Should I and all Gigaminers just keep trusting nefario? This is the exact reason to have a claims process in the first place. Nefario is withholding information for a mistake he made, Gigaminers should not have to suffer because of Nefario's mistakes any longer.
I have received claims for over 10% of Gigamining that are NOT on the lists given to me by GLBSE. This is a significant percentage and it warrants the claims process.
Finally, what should happen if I pay the wrong individual a large amount of the held coins? Guess what, I'm still on the hook according to the law. It is only right to protect the interests of all Gigaminers by making sure I have legal recourse should such a situation occur.
I hope it is clear that I am only trying to clean up and move forward from the situation at hand.
Best regards,
James
|
|
|
|
|
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 5180
Merit: 12884
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:53:24 PM |
|
I've decided that gigavps will not get a scammer tag for this. Nefario has proven himself to be untrustworthy, so it would be unreasonable for gigavps to pay out large sums of money based entirely on Nefario's list. Requiring affidavits and proofs of identity are reasonable precautions. It's impossible to strictly follow the contract in a safe way.
|
1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
|
|
|
|
DannyM
|
|
November 24, 2012, 08:54:05 PM |
|
He has already all the info needed to pay his investors. If the lists are incomplete, he can start paying who is already in the list. There is no freaking need of any invented legal bullshit.
OK, I'll accept that you are of the point of view that now that the lists are released, those addresses should be paid without any further verification. I accept that as a valid argument. I also accept gigavps' argument that if he doesn't do further verification of these lists, he opens himself to a mess if nefario is proven to have lied about the info in the future. I think you both have good-faith arguments there. I just want to point out that without the "invented legal bullshit", specifically without the pressure gigavps' lawyer put on nefario to release lists that nefario must have had no intention of ever releasing, based on his actions up to the escalation of the legal pressure, there would be no lists, and no addresses to repay. So I accept that some people will consider gigavps a scammer for not paying the lists as given by nefario, but gigavps' work in obtaining these lists in the first place, precludes the possibility of his intentions being to not pay at all. So say he should pay dividends indefinitely without any further info because you think that's the right thing to do, but don't project false intent to scam back to everything he did. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin Oz
|
|
November 24, 2012, 09:00:13 PM |
|
He has already all the info needed to pay his investors. If the lists are incomplete, he can start paying who is already in the list. There is no freaking need of any invented legal bullshit.
OK, I'll accept that you are of the point of view that now that the lists are released, those addresses should be paid without any further verification. I accept that as a valid argument. I also accept gigavps' argument that if he doesn't do further verification of these lists, he opens himself to a mess if nefario is proven to have lied about the info in the future. I think you both have good-faith arguments there. I just want to point out that without the "invented legal bullshit", specifically without the pressure gigavps' lawyer put on nefario to release lists that nefario must have had no intention of ever releasing, based on his actions up to the escalation of the legal pressure, there would be no lists, and no addresses to repay. So I accept that some people will consider gigavps a scammer for not paying the lists as given by nefario, but gigavps' work in obtaining these lists in the first place, precludes the possibility of his intentions being to not pay at all. So say he should pay dividends indefinitely without any further info because you think that's the right thing to do, but don't project false intent to scam back to everything he did. How do you know Nerfario isnt 25% of the claimants ? |
|
|
|
conspirosphere.tk (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1064
Bitcoin is antisemitic
|
|
November 24, 2012, 09:03:56 PM |
|
don't project false intent to scam back to everything he did.
It has already been explained above why this is at all effects a scam. And I see a clear malicious intent because he is asking for things that in many countries cost much more than the asset's value of the average investor. Since I don't think that he is willing to pay for official translations, lawyers and time lost for all of his investors, he must know like anyone else that a lot of his bonds cannot be claimed in this way. |
|
|
|
|
|
Deafboy
|
|
November 24, 2012, 09:04:18 PM |
|
So... Nefario didn't send giga the whole list of shareholders? I can't imagine the reason behind this. I know about the double payment issue, and Nefario waiting for the extra payments to be returned, but this seems to be unrelated issue.
Question for giga: people contacted by you via email was on the Nefario's list, or you have some other sources?
Question to everyone: How can revealing of identity prove you are rightful shareholder, if giga doesn't have trustworthy source to compare with (if we consider Nefarios list untrustworthy)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
