[Group Buy]12 KNCminer Jupiter's 15 Sold [Closed] Jupiter Pool

[dutu]

Hi agibby5,

Thank you for the feedback and for assisting this GB. I don't know if Soniq is paying you for clarifying the books (it is his duty to keep accurate and clear books) or you are just helping out, but thank you anyway.

I'm pretty confident that most members are being paid appropriately.  The ones that have contacted us to look at it have been accurate for their situation.

We expect that all (not "most") members are paid appropriately. We have requested soniq to fix the calculations and publish the result so it can be verified.
As for now, there is still information missing and it's quite impossible for us to verify. Requested information has not been given.

What I was surprised about is that the price paid out per share is different almost to each user  

This statement is in contradiction with previous note that "most members are being paid appropriately".

Someone would have to go into each user and calculate the payouts per share and determine the reason for the variance.  

Has soniq indicate who "someone" will be and by when this will be done?

I have proposed that this operation is "outsources"; Tyrion70 has agreed he can do it, but soniq refused.
What is the plan?

I am sorry to say, it is a shame that the miners are almost reaching end of life and soniq is still trying to figure out a good way to calculate and pay dividends. 7 months have passed since this GB has been initiated.

Nevertheless, there is still time to get things fixed. But the willingness and commitment must be there.

Thank you

[agibby5]

What I was surprised about is that the price paid out per share is different almost to each user  

This statement is in contradiction with previous note that "most members are being paid appropriately".

Not if you understand that each person has a different situation depending on the adjustments they received.  You can be paid appropriately depending on adjustments but that per share amount would be different than someone who had no adjustments.

[dutu]

What I was surprised about is that the price paid out per share is different almost to each user 

This statement is in contradiction with previous note that "most members are being paid appropriately".

Not if you understand that each person has a different situation depending on the adjustments they received.  You can be paid appropriately depending on adjustments but that per share amount would be different than someone who had no adjustments.

"price paid out per share" should have nothing to do with each member's "adjustments" due to loans, penalties, etc.
Dividend per share and "price paid out per share" is equal for each member of this GB. We need to be shown calculation on what dividend per share is and a separate calculation on how adjustment for each user is done.

It's just this simple.

[soniq]

I have asked one simple question that will allow me to continue with verifying the books: "amount of bitcoin mined at Gigapool"
You have failed to provide an answer.

One of your previous questions was the start date of mining, and could I verify.

So this is the information that is public

- number of Jupiters with trans ids
- amount per share and a debited or credited amount to each member
- a balanced spreadsheet showing all mining income and expenses
- ledger showing all dividend payments to all members
- Jupiters mining addresses with stats

In the very same post, when answering the question about how many coins have been mined at Gigapool, you write:

As far as you question about gigapool, at the beginning of the GB, Oct 14 only 5 days after receiving the Jupiters almost every GB member was watching very intently as there had not even been a dividend payment made yet. There was concerns about getting best hashing rate for the Jupiters and some members suggested trying different pools.  I tested Gigapool, and  posted to the forum I was doing so, So all the members could account for the 26 mining Jupiters.  I am looking for the transactions now.

Now, please let us know have the transaction been published and indicated in the balance sheet or you are still looking for these transactions now?
Please post them when you find them.

Here are Gigapool payouts   https://blockchain.info/address/1MuU5PysvNHiKxeFz9zBAqJcuNpuqDvuDt?offset=50&filter=0  use Ctl F to find  1EN3EqqQfqq484WNATFAMA13VXpJuJNv5c

That is all I can verify because www.mineb.tc is no longer available



BTW, regarding your statement

The spreadsheets and ledgers for this GB  have been verified by a forensic scientist with the Norwegian police and two software engineers.

can you confirm if these people have verified the data you have shared with the GB members or perhaps there is some additional unpublished data they have verified.
Please also confirm their forums name or identities so we can verify with them, and please publish their reports and findings. I'm sure this with give you and us peace of mind.

agibby has responded, I can ask the others to verify but understand if they do not want to reply

[BenTuras]

Not if you understand that each person has a different situation depending on the adjustments they received.  You can be paid appropriately depending on adjustments but that per share amount would be different than someone who had no adjustments.

Is this still the case for new dividend payments ?
Can you please explain this in detail ?
Are there still adjustments being made ?

[agibby5]

Not if you understand that each person has a different situation depending on the adjustments they received.  You can be paid appropriately depending on adjustments but that per share amount would be different than someone who had no adjustments.

Is this still the case for new dividend payments ?
Can you please explain this in detail ?
Are there still adjustments being made ?

For example, the user's per share amount received would be lower if they had a hosting payment penalty.

Another example would be someone who took a loan out from Larry.  They wouldn't get dividend payments until their shares generated enough mining to exceed the loan amount.  Example in ledger: 1LUxZq3iEX3U5mSS7Te6XWGkjzffgbdwtS

Another example is a case where someone prepaid hosting and then received a refund from paying too much.  Their payouts per share would be higher. Example in the ledger: 1LocAtpDxpuc2YBmuHHwBGvSHgmVy5C54C

Please let me know if I need to be more clear.  Some people have multiple adjustments which really confuses things.



To clarify the ledger spreadsheet: each positive entry for each user is what needs to be paid out to them.  Each negative entry is the amount that was paid out.  After each dividend payment, the sums should all zero out.  If they're not zero, then there was some issue OR the person owes Larry (in which the mining income goes from their account to Larry on every payout).  Negative would be overpaid. Positive would be underpaid.  When we run the software, the ledger spits out positive balances for each address and will be their next dividend payment.  Then we issue the payment, collect the transaction id and plug it in again.  This run will show all 0s as the dividend payment just balanced their accounts.

There could be some instances where the user's balance is 0 (which is what it should be), but there was some bookkeeping error where credits to their account weren't showing up.  If you look at the ledger for your account and think something is off, by all means let us know ASAP.  A cursory overview by myself and Larry turned up some problems but I think we solved them all. 

[BenTuras]

How can the books be balanced if it's so clear that some of the participants never got their refund for the share price/jupiter purchase price difference ?

I ask this again, and now more specific to one participant (it's me):
These are my transactions on the last sheet, that horrid mess on Ledger Jan 20/14:

Code:

	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-3.49282052	https://blockchain.info/tx/9074bdc9df9a46ea7f5d296885f66847e0964c92dd4ab4fa3da14eb54dbf91ec
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-10.6937631	https://blockchain.info/tx/ef13b0e1aae1d1fd8a6773a9f222ac5ae1d4122c839976d3dd8a434b1e350c5d
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-3.49282052	https://blockchain.info/tx/29b0b50d92b6bc240a62cccc804f0c40c08a235b27d1677bc5d8240b34ca19c5
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-0.01070447	https://blockchain.info/tx/2b43e9a81196fda1ccbbdae258a519c1dde535a86d3f03a2f45ca6bd68f1958d
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-10.47846154	https://blockchain.info/tx/a218e3583f0571377ef29fded24d47147c6820c6040ec1f07b8c2dd91e96f6d5
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-3.49282051	https://blockchain.info/tx/2aa34458daf0928789629d174424a8dd18e937550e0f49b18b958faeecf8f40e
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-1.78133844	https://blockchain.info/tx/32279ab5df9fd2b327500949fd0b5bcadda47d6f36cbf3283dbb11519f506436
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	-3.49282052	https://blockchain.info/tx/4d3ea5ba035605af59e2c2c57089a5f0b1f674e58306345b34d515d8b24ff247
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	4.54066667	GB1: 0.98 * 85 * 15/17 / 45000 compensation * (2780) shares
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	2.67098039	GB1: 0.98 * 50 BTC mined * 15/17 / 45000 mined * (2780) shares
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	24.44974359	0.98 * 700 BTC mined split between 78000 shares. Payment for (2780) shares
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	4.57559487	As of 12/29/2013: 0.98 * 131 BTC mined split between 78000 shares. Payment for (2780) shares
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr	0.6985641	As of 01/20/2014: 0.98 * 20 BTC mined split between 78000 shares. Payment for (2780) shares
	1Ji6RWCLiBDK4mJx5szy8XBiSV3h9feRfr Sum		0	

There is no prorated share price adjustment transaction. Many other participants do have one.

Now have a look at the tab Updated Balance Sheet in the excel sheet KNC Balance sheet. Search my name, Turas and go to column O, prorated. I see an amount of 2.43256 BTC, being the compensation you calculated for me.
If I calculate the compensation, I get this: share price I paid(2.25) -/- the Cost per share(2.159223) * number of shares(25): 25 * (2.25-2.159223) = 2.2694. The compensation you calculated and the one I just specified differ.
1. Can you explain the difference ?
2. Can you show me the transaction in which you refund me the compensation you calculated ?
Thanks.

[agibby5]

There is no prorated share price adjustment transaction. Many other participants do have one.

Now have a look at the tab Updated Balance Sheet in the excel sheet KNC Balance sheet. Search my name, Turas and go to column O, prorated. I see an amount of 2.43256 BTC, being the compensation you calculated for me.
If I calculate the compensation, I get this: share price I paid(2.25) -/- the Cost per share(2.159223) * number of shares(25): 25 * (2.25-2.159223) = 2.2694. The compensation you calculated and the one I just specified differ.
1. Can you explain the difference ?
2. Can you show me the transaction in which you refund me the compensation you calculated ?
Thanks.

I had nothing to do with creating the "KNC Balance Sheet" spreadsheet.  I also had nothing to do with discovering/calculating the price adjustments, hosting penalties, etc.  At this point, I don't know how to answer your question.

Just guessing... could some of the 2.4325 gone to the hosting payment? 

I think Larry would need to chime in on this one...

[dutu]

Hi agibby,

Since you helped to check the books, can you confirm that "mining income" indicated in the balance sheet is the income of the actual mining and does not include other incoming transactions?

Mining Income         
                 1EN3EqqQfqq484WNATFAMA13VXpJuJNv5c    806,0403326   Eligius Mining Address
                 1MyLJvnuHxkXUp8CMPNwp1oKFz5fDsF14u    526,8499516   Bitminter Mining Address
as of 1/31  Total Mining income  Received                    1332,890284      

Thanks

[agibby5]

Hi agibby,

Since you helped to check the books, can you confirm that "mining income" indicated in the balance sheet is the income of the actual mining and does not include other incoming transactions?

Mining Income         
                 1EN3EqqQfqq484WNATFAMA13VXpJuJNv5c    806,0403326   Eligius Mining Address
                 1MyLJvnuHxkXUp8CMPNwp1oKFz5fDsF14u    526,8499516   Bitminter Mining Address
as of 1/31  Total Mining income  Received                    1332,890284      

Thanks

I don't recall any major incoming transactions other than mining.  There were some that were small like .01 or something, but that's negligible.  When we decided to look at the blockchain incoming BTC, Larry reaffirmed that the only incoming transactions were from mining.

[dutu]

Hi agibby,

I have reviewed Soniq’s balance sheet and mining income.
I will finalize the review, but let me share preliminary findings.

Firstly let me note that this verification is on the transactions up to Jan 31.

Excel file with verification calculation and results: http://sdrv.ms/1bkoevq

I.   Verification of total income amount and expenses

The conclusion is that my verification shows exactly the same total income amount as published by Soniq in the balance sheet.
This is, total income 1332,89 BTC.

Also the total expenses calculated by me comes to the same amount as in Soniq’s balance sheet.
This is total expenses -211,23 BTC.

Which gives total accumulated for dividend payout is 1121,66 BTC.


II.   Comparison of total income amount to “expected” mining income

I have also compared the mining income in the balance sheet with expected mining income".
I have considers the starting mining dates as declared by Soniq, i.e.
•   Oct 11 when GB1 miners (15 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
•   Oct 15 when GB2 miners (11 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
(Note: In fact some GB1 miners have started before Oct 11, but the income before Oct 11 can be considered minor)

Calculation of "expected mining income" has been done based on
* mining period (i.e from Oct 11 (GB1) and Oct 15 (GB2) until Jan 31)
* Jupiter hashing power
* bitcoin network difficulty and
* mining calculator for applicable bitcoin difficulty.

The conclusion is that the total mining income in Soniq’s balance sheet is in line with calculated expected income.
I have considered Jupiter hashing power = 550GH/s and applied an efficiency factor of 97.5%.
Under this conditions, the total income in Soniq’s balance sheet differs with less than 1% from the “expected income”


III.   Corrections needed

As shown in detailed mining breakdown on period intervals GB2 members have been paid for part of mining income attributed to GB1 miners.

As it can be seen on lines 24 and 25, mining income was not received in full to soniq’s wallet from the mining pools (note the difference between received amount and expected amount).
Part of bitcoin mined under period Oct 11 – Oct 15 was transferred to soniq’s wallet after only Oct 16 (on line 26 note the positive difference between received vs expected).
 
As shown in the table, amount of coins mined by GB1 15 miners (before GB2 and GB3 11 miners arrived) was 85.48 coins.
Soniq has issued a payment of 50 BTC for GB1, when in fact it should have been 85.48 BTC.
 
Incorrect amount paid to GB2: (85.48-50)/78000*33000 = 15 BTC.
In conclusion a correction is required to be done at next dividend pay-out: deduct 15 BTC from dividends for GB2 users and pay this out to GB1 users

I would like to ask you to verify the information I have posted here and confirm.
Please doublecheck with Soniq’s, and once confirmed please apply the required correction.

Please verify and provide your and Soniq's feedback on above calculation and verification asap, before the next payout so that required correction can be applied. Other GB members are welcome to comment and provide feedback.

[soniq]

Thank you for your analysis dutu

Me and agibby are looking into this and Bens question.

 Espen the original programmer will be back from a business trip on Wednesday, and will help us to clarify all the transactions to date.

Will have a clarified response before next dividend payment.

Thank you for your patience

[dutu]

Thank you for your analysis dutu

Me and Agibby are looking into this and Bens question.

 Espen the original programmer will be back from a business trip on Wednesday, and will help us to clarify all the transactions to date.

Will have a clarified response before next dividend payment.

Thank you for your patience

Hi Soniq and agibby,

Please provide feedback on the verification i have provided.
It took me a couple of hours to produce the excel file, surly checking it and validating can't take more than that.

[MilkyLep]

@Ben and dutu, did you ever receive further response to your requests/questions?

It looks like the books are still in need in verification or for those that soniq claimed already took a look and audited the books to speak up.

Wasn't there supposed to be another dividend this past weekend?

Additionally, what's going on with the merge-mined Namecoins? How are we to claim these and where/how have they been accounted for?

[BenTuras]

@Ben and dutu, did you ever receive further response to your requests/questions?

None outside the forum messages, which only answer part of the questions.
My biggest question is the missing refunds for the jupiter purchase price versus share purchase price difference, which is over 2.2BTC for me for example. Soniq has ignored my questions about this missing refunds. I think everyone should check if they deserve a refund and got it or not.

It looks like the books are still in need in verification or for those that soniq claimed already took a look and audited the books to speak up.

Agree and not much is happening in here.

Wasn't there supposed to be another dividend this past weekend?

Yes, Soniq promised weekly dividend payments, but you know what his promises are worth...

Additionally, what's going on with the merge-mined Namecoins? How are we to claim these and where/how have they been accounted for?

It was suggested to go to http://bitcoinfun.ca/nmcsign/ and link your btc address to your nmc address.
Don't take my word for it tho. I haven't done this yet.

[dutu]

Hi agibby,

I have posted these findings on Feb 02.
Can you please verify these and provide feedback (as you have been working with soniq to clarify the books and findings)

You hove have an agreement with soniq that you should not provide further feedback or checks on the balance sheet and payments, please let us know. At leas we should know if we can expect or not feedback from you.

It is really disappointing that all went very silent again with no further feedback, payments or information being provided to share holders.

Hi agibby,

I have reviewed Soniq’s balance sheet and mining income.
I will finalize the review, but let me share preliminary findings.

Firstly let me note that this verification is on the transactions up to Jan 31.

Excel file with verification calculation and results: http://sdrv.ms/1bkoevq

I.   Verification of total income amount and expenses

The conclusion is that my verification shows exactly the same total income amount as published by Soniq in the balance sheet.
This is, total income 1332,89 BTC.

Also the total expenses calculated by me comes to the same amount as in Soniq’s balance sheet.
This is total expenses -211,23 BTC.

Which gives total accumulated for dividend payout is 1121,66 BTC.


II.   Comparison of total income amount to “expected” mining income

I have also compared the mining income in the balance sheet with expected mining income".
I have considers the starting mining dates as declared by Soniq, i.e.
•   Oct 11 when GB1 miners (15 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
•   Oct 15 when GB2 miners (11 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
(Note: In fact some GB1 miners have started before Oct 11, but the income before Oct 11 can be considered minor)

Calculation of "expected mining income" has been done based on
* mining period (i.e from Oct 11 (GB1) and Oct 15 (GB2) until Jan 31)
* Jupiter hashing power
* bitcoin network difficulty and
* mining calculator for applicable bitcoin difficulty.

The conclusion is that the total mining income in Soniq’s balance sheet is in line with calculated expected income.
I have considered Jupiter hashing power = 550GH/s and applied an efficiency factor of 97.5%.
Under this conditions, the total income in Soniq’s balance sheet differs with less than 1% from the “expected income”


III.   Corrections needed

As shown in detailed mining breakdown on period intervals GB2 members have been paid for part of mining income attributed to GB1 miners.

As it can be seen on lines 24 and 25, mining income was not received in full to soniq’s wallet from the mining pools (note the difference between received amount and expected amount).
Part of bitcoin mined under period Oct 11 – Oct 15 was transferred to soniq’s wallet after only Oct 16 (on line 26 note the positive difference between received vs expected).
 
As shown in the table, amount of coins mined by GB1 15 miners (before GB2 and GB3 11 miners arrived) was 85.48 coins.
Soniq has issued a payment of 50 BTC for GB1, when in fact it should have been 85.48 BTC.
 
Incorrect amount paid to GB2: (85.48-50)/78000*33000 = 15 BTC.
In conclusion a correction is required to be done at next dividend pay-out: deduct 15 BTC from dividends for GB2 users and pay this out to GB1 users

I would like to ask you to verify the information I have posted here and confirm.
Please doublecheck with Soniq’s, and once confirmed please apply the required correction.

Please verify and provide your and Soniq's feedback on above calculation and verification asap, before the next payout so that required correction can be applied. Other GB members are welcome to comment and provide feedback.

[agibby5]

Hi agibby,

I have posted these findings on Feb 02.
Can you please verify these and provide feedback (as you have been working with soniq to clarify the books and findings)

You hove have an agreement with soniq that you should not provide further feedback or checks on the balance sheet and payments, please let us know. At leas we should know if we can expect or not feedback from you.

It is really disappointing that all went very silent again with no further feedback, payments or information being provided to share holders.

Hi agibby,

I have reviewed Soniq’s balance sheet and mining income.
I will finalize the review, but let me share preliminary findings.

Firstly let me note that this verification is on the transactions up to Jan 31.

Excel file with verification calculation and results: http://sdrv.ms/1bkoevq

I.   Verification of total income amount and expenses

The conclusion is that my verification shows exactly the same total income amount as published by Soniq in the balance sheet.
This is, total income 1332,89 BTC.

Also the total expenses calculated by me comes to the same amount as in Soniq’s balance sheet.
This is total expenses -211,23 BTC.

Which gives total accumulated for dividend payout is 1121,66 BTC.


II.   Comparison of total income amount to “expected” mining income

I have also compared the mining income in the balance sheet with expected mining income".
I have considers the starting mining dates as declared by Soniq, i.e.
•   Oct 11 when GB1 miners (15 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
•   Oct 15 when GB2 miners (11 miners) have reached advertised hashing  rate
(Note: In fact some GB1 miners have started before Oct 11, but the income before Oct 11 can be considered minor)

Calculation of "expected mining income" has been done based on
* mining period (i.e from Oct 11 (GB1) and Oct 15 (GB2) until Jan 31)
* Jupiter hashing power
* bitcoin network difficulty and
* mining calculator for applicable bitcoin difficulty.

The conclusion is that the total mining income in Soniq’s balance sheet is in line with calculated expected income.
I have considered Jupiter hashing power = 550GH/s and applied an efficiency factor of 97.5%.
Under this conditions, the total income in Soniq’s balance sheet differs with less than 1% from the “expected income”


III.   Corrections needed

As shown in detailed mining breakdown on period intervals GB2 members have been paid for part of mining income attributed to GB1 miners.

As it can be seen on lines 24 and 25, mining income was not received in full to soniq’s wallet from the mining pools (note the difference between received amount and expected amount).
Part of bitcoin mined under period Oct 11 – Oct 15 was transferred to soniq’s wallet after only Oct 16 (on line 26 note the positive difference between received vs expected).
 
As shown in the table, amount of coins mined by GB1 15 miners (before GB2 and GB3 11 miners arrived) was 85.48 coins.
Soniq has issued a payment of 50 BTC for GB1, when in fact it should have been 85.48 BTC.
 
Incorrect amount paid to GB2: (85.48-50)/78000*33000 = 15 BTC.
In conclusion a correction is required to be done at next dividend pay-out: deduct 15 BTC from dividends for GB2 users and pay this out to GB1 users

I would like to ask you to verify the information I have posted here and confirm.
Please doublecheck with Soniq’s, and once confirmed please apply the required correction.

Please verify and provide your and Soniq's feedback on above calculation and verification asap, before the next payout so that required correction can be applied. Other GB members are welcome to comment and provide feedback.

I only focued time on trying to balance the books in terms of what has been paid out to individuals. I hadn't looked at anything having to do with how much GB1 owes GB2 or vice versa. I'm not sure why this would be the case though... I don't think you can make the assumptions about expected income vs actual and then make an adjustment based on that.   That was not my goal.

I finally got a hold of soniq recently and he reported to me that he's had a family emergency which is why he's been silent.

He's also waiting to hear back from espen about how the share price adjustments were handled or any issues that might have occurred there which Ben raised.

For the record, I'm nowhere near or desire to be the spokesperson for this GB or for soniq.  In fact, soniq has taken objection to some of the replies I have made in the past. Please do not take my prior or current replies as such.

[dutu]

Thanks for your reply, agibby.

It's quite said if soniq is attempting to censure the communication -the operation was supposed to be totally transparent, so we should really wonder if something is to be hidden from group members.

As a second note, we see soniq going online on this forum!!!
Surly, a one-line-update to group buy members here can't be that difficult.

[agibby5]

Thanks for your reply, agibby.

It's quite said if soniq is attempting to censure the communication -the operation was supposed to be totally transparent, so we should really wonder if something is to be hidden from group members.

As a second note, we see soniq going online on this forum!!!
Surly, a one-line-update to group buy members here can't be that difficult.

I don't think he's trying to censure anything. I just don't have a way with words that most people agree with

[hardpick]

Thank you for your analysis dutu

Me and agibby are looking into this and Bens question.

 Espen the original programmer will be back from a business trip on Wednesday, and will help us to clarify all the transactions to date.

Will have a clarified response before next dividend payment.

Thank you for your patience

Has this Being fixed ?
when can we expect the next dividend payment.?