Wtf can you do when an operator goes rogue ?

[Bitcoin Oz]

People can believe otherwise but thats my view of the situation.

The fact I get treated differently than an investor in any of those is bullshit and hypocritical.

Your view is fine, but it's irrelevant to the legal realities.  Your view is a reflection of how you believe things should be in the world of toy businesses.

I doubt that anyone is going to sue the "shareholders" of BitcoinGlobal.  In the "real" world, if they did then it would be up to whichever shareholders ending up paying out the judgement/settlement to try to recover funds from Nefario and/or the other shareholders.

I doubt that anyone is going to sue usagi, either, even though he's improperly using what should be secured assets for personal advantage.  In respect of usagi's ventures, it seems much more clear cut that his shareholders are not partners and that he's essentially operating as a sole trader (which would make him the only one legally responsible for any debts). 

In that case I also see no difference in owning shares in MPEX which would mean buying even 1 share makes you liable for all its debts public and private and satoshidice since both are "unregistered companies"

The fact they are misleading people into unlimited liability is unfortunate.

[repentance]

In that case I also see no difference in owning shares in MPEX which would mean buying even 1 share makes you liable for all its debts public and private and satoshidice since both are "unregistered companies"

The fact they are misleading people into unlimited liability is unfortunate.

I honestly don't know how they're set up, so I hope that MPOE-PR will come along and clarify that.  There are ways you could set it up so that only some shareholders had liability without setting up a company (by issuing different types of shares, for instance, so that investors were basically limited partners) but as a general rule you need to take an action of some kind to limit liability.

It bothers me that so few enterprises do go to the trouble of incorporating because it's not particularly expensive and a lot of Bitcoin enterprises find themselves controlling large amounts of other people's funds within months of opening.  When enterprises are skimping on standard business start-up costs, it always makes me wonder how else they're cutting corners.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Its a form of entrapment whether unintentional or not.

[usagi]

Cognitive is operated by Garr255
Nasty mining is operated by Og Nasty
CPA/BMF is operated by Usagi.
GLBSE was operated by Nefario.


My question is by owning shares in them should you have unlimited liability if the operator goes rogue ?

There seems to be some illusion that owning shares in one of them in particular is a different animal than all the rest when there is no actual difference being that the operator controls the day to day operations and the shareholders have very little power to change anything. What can you do when they effectively steal the company and cause massive losses to its customers

Are you supposed to be treated like a leper because you invested in any of these companies which for all intents and purposes are exactly the same ?

If this is the case we are going to have to rethink shareholder agreements in the bitcoin  world. Because if an operator issues a security which makes the buyer liable for massive losses that is unacceptable.

BitcoinOZ You ASSHOLE.

Dear forum readers:

BitcoinOz has decided to try and get out of the following agreement we made in PM:

BitcoinRS is approved on BTCT.co so make an account and I will transfer your shares.

If it is ok with you I would like to transfer the shares to someone else. Can you give me an approximate current value on a per-share basis? I would like to transfer them asap, this weekend if possible. My word in PM should be good enough but if you require a GPG signature I can do it~ Is this ok?

A gpg signed contract transferring ownership would be good. My email is dabitcoind@gmail.com.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ap5R4XKV12_YdGNNRUtRZHVTTFc2aVFPZWtmUlJHTVE#gid=0  this is the holdings but the current value may change based on how many outstanding shares get claimed from glbse. 0.05 per share is what I am currently valuing them at.

My public key - ID 0xDD42D4B5

This contract is valued at ~100 bitcoins. So, what happened? 5 days later BitcoinOZ sees a way he can avoid paying me. He starts stitting up shit on the scammer accusation forum (and here) and then tries this shit:

This is what I mean. The assets should be sold and distributed to ALL shareholders. Doing things differently rips them off.

Thats if there are any other shareholders by now  lol.

That is why when you approached me with a deal to take 2,000 shares of BitcoinRS privately on another exchange I turned you down. You were obviously trying to entrap me and/or rip off your other shareholders.

(No you weren't but it's easy to put a spin on something, isn't it?)

You already owned 2000 shares. You paid 98btc for them when the asset was listed on glbse and this was an offer to send you the same amount on the new listing.

Im sure the other shareholders will be more than happy with your donation of 2000 shares since you just offered to not accept them.

I mean seriously, WTF?

And then when that doesn't work he does this:

I can't imagine you've thought this though and realize you are asking me to split up BITCOINRS 50 different ways. It just doesn't make sense.

I dont care wtf you do after you claim the sares and nothing is stopping you doing so. If you want to commit a  financial crime Im not your goddamn accessory.

What a fucking slimeball. Now that he has decided not to transfer the shares to someone else at my request because he has decided to only transfer them to me so that he does not become an accessory to a... financial crime? Huh?

And in the message up he claims I'm asking him to do extra work assigning it to someone else other than me?

BitcoinRS is a real jerk. Unlimited liability my ass. He's just a big jerk.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Youre the only one being an asshole. The "contract" was for 2000 shares in the asset not 100 bitcoins. You can claim them by getting an exchange account and Ill transfer them.

Stop being obtuse.

[usagi]

Youre the only one being an asshole. The "contract" was for 2000 shares in the asset not 100 bitcoins. You can claim them by getting an exchange account and Ill transfer them.

Stop being obtuse.

Stop being an asshole on the forums because you decided to get out of something you agreed to do:

1. Stop accusing me of committing financial fraud.
2. Stop questioning the validity of the loans CPA took.
3. Stop stating CPA was trading while insolvent.
4. Stop saying CPA is/was insolvent.
5. Stop saying BMF is/was scamming people
6. Stop being a jerk.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Youre the only one being an asshole. The "contract" was for 2000 shares in the asset not 100 bitcoins. You can claim them by getting an exchange account and Ill transfer them.

Stop being obtuse.

Stop being an asshole on the forums because you decided to get out of something you agreed to do:

1. Stop accusing me of committing financial fraud.
2. Stop questioning the validity of the loans CPA took.
3. Stop stating CPA was trading while insolvent.
4. Stop saying CPA is/was insolvent.
5. Stop saying BMF is/was scamming people
6. Stop being a jerk.

If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans. It means the company now owes you the money not the person you gave the loan too. Just because you gave the company a loan doesnt remove it from the books.

Im sure you would know this, since you're such a wonderful company director. Such things should be reported on the financial statements as a liability.

[usagi]

If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans. It means the company now owes you the money not the person you gave the loan too. Just because you gave the company a loan doesnt remove it from the books.

Im sure you would know this, since you're such a wonderful company director.

Bzzt. I can think of 10 different reasons why I would need to/want to do it this way. You know what? Why don't you make a scam accusation thread against me regarding this?

You know, lay out your case... clearly state what I did as if you know what I did, and see how far it gets? Why not? If I am a scammer and you have proof, the mods usually handle it within a couple days.

Anwyays as I said over in the S.A. forum I'm going to ignore you for a couple days as it's clear you've become unstable. If you make a scam accusation thread tho I'll post in it. Good luck with that. (Oh, and you realize that NOT making such a post will make it look like you have shit for proof and don't have the guts to stand by what you say, right? I'm waiting.)

[Bitcoin Oz]

If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans. It means the company now owes you the money not the person you gave the loan too. Just because you gave the company a loan doesnt remove it from the books.

Im sure you would know this, since you're such a wonderful company director.

Bzzt. I can think of 10 different reasons why I would need to/want to do it this way. You know what? Why don't you make a scam accusation thread against me regarding this?

You know, lay out your case... clearly state what I did as if you know what I did, and see how far it gets? Why not? If I am a scammer and you have proof, the mods usually handle it within a couple days.

Anwyays as I said over in the S.A. forum I'm going to ignore you for a couple days as it's clear you've become unstable. If you make a scam accusation thread tho I'll post in it. Good luck with that. (Oh, and you realize that NOT making such a post will make it look like you have shit for proof and don't have the guts to stand by what you say, right? I'm waiting.)

I assume you have financial records and they clearly show the liabilities ? That is about the only way to prove whether a company is solvent or not.

[Bitcoin Oz]

If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans. It means the company now owes you the money not the person you gave the loan too. Just because you gave the company a loan doesnt remove it from the books.

Im sure you would know this, since you're such a wonderful company director.

Bzzt. I can think of 10 different reasons why I would need to/want to do it this way. You know what? Why don't you make a scam accusation thread against me regarding this?

You know, lay out your case... clearly state what I did as if you know what I did, and see how far it gets? Why not? If I am a scammer and you have proof, the mods usually handle it within a couple days.

Anwyays as I said over in the S.A. forum I'm going to ignore you for a couple days as it's clear you've become unstable. If you make a scam accusation thread tho I'll post in it. Good luck with that. (Oh, and you realize that NOT making such a post will make it look like you have shit for proof and don't have the guts to stand by what you say, right? I'm waiting.)

You need to do an independent financial audit report. Im not qualified to do such things but since you claim the company ios solvent an independent audit should clear it right up. I'll make a scam accusation  when you get an independent audit done and it shows the full state of the "company"

[repentance]

Its a form of entrapment whether unintentional or not.

Bullshit.  The onus is always on the buyer/investor/business partner to seek their own independent advice.  What do you think the requirements for product disclosure statements and prospectuses, partnership agreements and the like are all about?  You're supposed to read them and obtain independent advice before making an investment - it's not someone else's fault if you don't do your due diligence.  

If you were blatantly lied to and there is no way that appropriate due diligence could have revealed the lie, then you can start talking about "entrapment", but being too lazy to do your homework doesn't and shouldn't excuse you from the consequences of bad decisions.

[Bitcoin Oz]

If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans. It means the company now owes you the money not the person you gave the loan too. Just because you gave the company a loan doesnt remove it from the books.

Im sure you would know this, since you're such a wonderful company director.

Bzzt. I can think of 10 different reasons why I would need to/want to do it this way. You know what? Why don't you make a scam accusation thread against me regarding this?

You know, lay out your case... clearly state what I did as if you know what I did, and see how far it gets? Why not? If I am a scammer and you have proof, the mods usually handle it within a couple days.

Anwyays as I said over in the S.A. forum I'm going to ignore you for a couple days as it's clear you've become unstable. If you make a scam accusation thread tho I'll post in it. Good luck with that. (Oh, and you realize that NOT making such a post will make it look like you have shit for proof and don't have the guts to stand by what you say, right? I'm waiting.)

Why should we be surprised you get financial advice from the SA forums....

[usagi]

You were partner, but now you like to call yourself shareholder. How convenient!

I owned bitcoinglobal shares on glbse and went to shareholder meetings. I also own telstra shares in Australia and go to the annual general shareholder meeting. Exactly what different level of liability does that imply Im not aware of ?

You are intentionally misrepresenting the nature of your position as a "shareholder". You were NOT a "shareholder" in that sense, and you KNOW it.

Please allow me to quote from the Bitcoin Global Governing Bylaws:

Part 4 - Membership
1. A person shall be considered to be a Member if they own at least one share of
BitcoinGlobal.
2. A Member is accorded the following rights, privileges, and obligations;
1. An equal vote in the Voting Process for each share.
2. The right to put forth motions requiring Member votes.
3. The right to second motions put forth by another Member.
4. The obligation to make their best effort to participate in the Voting Process and to
maintain a Forum account for that purpose.
5. The obligation to provide up to date e-mail contact information with the
BitcoinGlobal Secretary.
6. The obligation to keep a GPG key pair, to make the public key available to all
members, and to keep the private key secure.
7. The obligation to verify the public GPG keys of other members and to have the
same done for your own public key.

You were a MEMBER. And as you had voting rights during minutes, this "member" means "member of the board".

That's point one.

Point two is, as a member of the Bitcoin Global board, have you ever agreed to cover up a crime for the purpose of financial gain? Think about that one.

[repentance]

Why should we be surprised you get financial advice from the SA forums....

I think he means the "Scam Accusations" forum.  The goons in BF&C would eat him alive.

[Bitcoin Oz]

You were partner, but now you like to call yourself shareholder. How convenient!

I owned bitcoinglobal shares on glbse and went to shareholder meetings. I also own telstra shares in Australia and go to the annual general shareholder meeting. Exactly what different level of liability does that imply Im not aware of ?

You are intentionally misrepresenting the nature of your position as a "shareholder". You were NOT a "shareholder" in that sense, and you KNOW it.

Please allow me to quote from the Bitcoin Global Governing Bylaws:

Part 4 - Membership
1. A person shall be considered to be a Member if they own at least one share of
BitcoinGlobal.
2. A Member is accorded the following rights, privileges, and obligations;
1. An equal vote in the Voting Process for each share.
2. The right to put forth motions requiring Member votes.
3. The right to second motions put forth by another Member.
4. The obligation to make their best effort to participate in the Voting Process and to
maintain a Forum account for that purpose.
5. The obligation to provide up to date e-mail contact information with the
BitcoinGlobal Secretary.
6. The obligation to keep a GPG key pair, to make the public key available to all
members, and to keep the private key secure.
7. The obligation to verify the public GPG keys of other members and to have the
same done for your own public key.

You were a MEMBER. And as you had voting rights during minutes, this "member" means "member of the board".

That's point one.

Point two is, as a member of the Bitcoin Global board, have you ever agreed to cover up a crime for the purpose of financial gain? Think about that one.

What crime.

For the record in your thread you are proposing a financial crime by preferencing some shareholders over the others. I didnt say you were a criminal. Am I supposed to just ignore that ?

[MPOE-PR]

Cognitive is operated by Garr255
Nasty mining is operated by Og Nasty
CPA/BMF is operated by Usagi.
GLBSE was operated by Nefario.


My question is by owning shares in them should you have unlimited liability if the operator goes rogue ?

There seems to be some illusion that owning shares in one of them in particular is a different animal than all the rest when there is no actual difference being that the operator controls the day to day operations and the shareholders have very little power to change anything. What can you do when they effectively steal the company and cause massive losses to its customers

Are you supposed to be treated like a leper because you invested in any of these companies which for all intents and purposes are exactly the same ?

If this is the case we are going to have to rethink shareholder agreements in the bitcoin  world. Because if an operator issues a security which makes the buyer liable for massive losses that is unacceptable.

Nice one, trying to pass a doe for a hen.

People weren't after you for "being a shareholder". People were after you for being a partner of a partnership. Different story.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Cognitive is operated by Garr255
Nasty mining is operated by Og Nasty
CPA/BMF is operated by Usagi.
GLBSE was operated by Nefario.


My question is by owning shares in them should you have unlimited liability if the operator goes rogue ?

There seems to be some illusion that owning shares in one of them in particular is a different animal than all the rest when there is no actual difference being that the operator controls the day to day operations and the shareholders have very little power to change anything. What can you do when they effectively steal the company and cause massive losses to its customers

Are you supposed to be treated like a leper because you invested in any of these companies which for all intents and purposes are exactly the same ?

If this is the case we are going to have to rethink shareholder agreements in the bitcoin  world. Because if an operator issues a security which makes the buyer liable for massive losses that is unacceptable.

Nice one, trying to pass a doe for a hen.

People weren't after you for "being a shareholder". People were after you for being a partner of a partnership. Different story.

But MPEX is pretty much the same setup. An unregistered company offering shares which in fact will make you a partner and liable for all the company actions.

Thats the point I am making here.

[MPOE-PR]

But MPEX is pretty much the same setup. An unregistered company offering shares which in fact will make you a partner and liable for all the company actions.

Thats the point I am making here.

Except not at all, but by all means carry on trying to wash things that don't wash. It's how reputations get ruined (not much of a concern for you, obviously).

[Korbman]

My question is by owning shares in them should you have unlimited liability if the operator goes rogue?

There seems to be some illusion that owning shares in one of them in particular is a different animal than all the rest when there is no actual difference being that the operator controls the day to day operations and the shareholders have very little power to change anything. What can you do when they effectively steal the company and cause massive losses to its customers

Are you supposed to be treated like a leper because you invested in any of these companies which for all intents and purposes are exactly the same ?

If this is the case we are going to have to rethink shareholder agreements in the bitcoin world. Because if an operator issues a security which makes the buyer liable for massive losses that is unacceptable.

Naturally I speak for myself and my company, but this is the same sort of thought process I had back when GLBSE was still around and people had securities on it. When things started to take a turn for the worse with them, I started to really reconsider the direction of my company.
That's why I went legit, in the full sense of the word. I registered my company in the state of Vermont and all normal Federal organizations, as well as the IRS. I spoke with lawyers and drafted up legal documents that tie my Fund with my company. And yes, they are in fact LEGAL and BINDING.

Nothing. Sue them?
Nothing. Call the police?
Nothing. And that's the lesson.

I should spend thousands of dollars on a lawsuit because I bought a few shares ? Surely there is a better solution.

That said, it would be very unwise for me to "go rogue". In that event, I could (more than likely, would) be sued by any investor. Stipulations within my contracts require me to cover the costs associated with the return of the investors money in this event as well.


Part of why I did this was to stand out from the rest...I didn't want to be just another "Mining Fund". I'd like to think formalizing and legalizing the process has helped.

[Bitcoin Oz]

But MPEX is pretty much the same setup. An unregistered company offering shares which in fact will make you a partner and liable for all the company actions.

Thats the point I am making here.

Except not at all, but by all means carry on trying to wash things that don't wash. It's how reputations get ruined (not much of a concern for you, obviously).

That doesnt answer the question.