-

[sparky999]

That was a lot less dodgy than when he announced he had bought hardware with his own funds and was mining with it at the same place 'our' hardware was hashing and that he was planning on switching it over to us soon. That was a monumental conflict of interest to put in nicely. It's also all we require to pierce the corporate veil in case a law suit materialises.

[||bit]

Wouldn't surprise me if the new hardware is already mining away solely for LR, instead of for us. It was the same thing last time

I don't think he wants to go to prison, so I doubt it. What are you talking about last time? When did he mine for himself only?

Don't you remember the last batch of hardware, where he was going to mine for 2 weeks and then back for us, except that 2 weeks turned into some sort of rolling 2 weeks between first piece of HW and last piece of HW, which ended up in I think 5?

Yeah. But did the hardware first receive mine for two weeks or five? Ifso, I'd say it was disingenuous at worse. And as long as the mined coins were traded for even more new hardware it doesn't matter. But of course we can't see that to verify it since there is no transparency (yet) - which would why part of a lawsuit would include opening the books for transparency.

[CumpsD]

Wouldn't surprise me if the new hardware is already mining away solely for LR, instead of for us. It was the same thing last time

I don't think he wants to go to prison, so I doubt it. What are you talking about last time? When did he mine for himself only?

Don't you remember the last batch of hardware, where he was going to mine for 2 weeks and then back for us, except that 2 weeks turned into some sort of rolling 2 weeks between first piece of HW and last piece of HW, which ended up in I think 5?

Yeah. But did the hardware first receive mine for two weeks or five? Ifso, I'd say it was disingenuous at worse. And as long as the mined coins were traded for even more new hardware it doesn't matter. But of course we can't see that to verify it since there is no transparency (yet) - which would why part of a lawsuit would include opening the books for transparency.

Doesn't really matter for me, he lost trust long ago, since that is what it's all about for a company, trust.

[||bit]

That was a lot less dodgy than when he announced he had bought hardware with his own funds and was mining with it at the same place 'our' hardware was hashing and that he was planning on switching it over to us soon. That was a monumental conflict of interest to put in nicely. It's also all we require to pierce the corporate veil in case a law suit materialises.

I don't think that's needed to crack open the books anyway. The way this was all structured from the beginning was apparently built on sand from a regulatory/legal standpoint. So, even if a new contract was made that is perfectly in accordance with all legal angles, it can't undo what was done to hurt investors. I don't know for a fact, but even if one agree's to a new contract that might not include a guarantee of honoring the spirit of the original agreement, but only with Zach saying "just trust me on that", and then Zach breaks the spirit of the original contract, I highly suspect a person could still sue using the original contract despite agreeing to a new one. After all, in the end, investors investments would be ruined because of the original poorly (illegally?) constructed contract that put investors into that situation in the first place.

Imagine this scenario: A person commits fraud and takes your investment. Then he rewrites the agreement in an attempt to replace that original scenario with a legal model that does the same to you but leaves the perpetrator an apparent loophole out...and you accept that agreement. Can the investor still sue for the original fraud if he feels like it was a disingenuous maneuver or sleight of hand with the new agreement? I think so.

[Komodorpudel]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?



I expect any documents, that confirm that your lawyer is really working on something till friday( shouldn't be that hard), otherwise i will contact the SEC. I really have enough of this bullshit...
(I will post the reply as soon as i receive an answer)

 If anyone has reasonable arguments against or maybe a better idea, just tell me.

[fractal02]

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

[sparky999]

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

Pretty sure Bargraphics visited the data centre I may be mis-remembering but I am like 85% sure.

[sparky999]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?



I expect any documents, that confirm that your lawyer is really working on something till friday( shouldn't be that hard), otherwise i will contact the SEC. I really have enough of this bullshit...
(I will post the reply as soon as i receive an answer)

 If anyone has reasonable arguments against or maybe a better idea, just tell me.

Shareholders are working behind the scenes, if you would like to be included in the discussion PM me and please include the number of current shares you hold, i.e. how many 100Mh shares.

[elitenoob]

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

Pretty sure Bargraphics visited the data centre I may be mis-remembering but I am like 85% sure.

He should make a visit again, to see how huge this mining farm is atm

[Bargraphics]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?

He exists, I've personally met him.

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

Pretty sure Bargraphics visited the data centre I may be mis-remembering but I am like 85% sure.

I did visit him and I saw all of the gear for the 25TH mining away. This is the same trip where I met his lawyer as well.


No I do not have any idea on why this is taking so long, but it is strictly out of Lab Rats hands at the moment. It would most likely cause a bigger delay to try and go with a different lawyer since this one knows all of the workings of Lab Rat Mining as he's been part of it since Day 1 from my understanding.


Try to focus on the real issues, not the make believe ones.

The real issue is there's no communication and lack of transparency. Those won't be resolved until the Lawyer is done. A vicious circle it seems.

[||bit]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?

He exists, I've personally met him.

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

Pretty sure Bargraphics visited the data centre I may be mis-remembering but I am like 85% sure.

I did visit him and I saw all of the gear for the 25TH mining away. This is the same trip where I met his lawyer as well.


No I do not have any idea on why this is taking so long, but it is strictly out of Lab Rats hands at the moment. It would most likely cause a bigger delay to try and go with a different lawyer since this one knows all of the workings of Lab Rat Mining as he's been part of it since Day 1 from my understanding.


Try to focus on the real issues, not the make believe ones.

The real issue is there's no communication and lack of transparency. Those won't be resolved until the Lawyer is done. A vicious circle it seems.

Thanks Bargraphics!

[Endlessa]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?

He exists, I've personally met him.

We need to visit LRM mine.

To see if hardware is real, to see if all this history is real.

We haven't any proof that 17 TH/s isn't just some Th/s bought at cex.io with our money...

Pretty sure Bargraphics visited the data centre I may be mis-remembering but I am like 85% sure.

I did visit him and I saw all of the gear for the 25TH mining away. This is the same trip where I met his lawyer as well.


No I do not have any idea on why this is taking so long, but it is strictly out of Lab Rats hands at the moment. It would most likely cause a bigger delay to try and go with a different lawyer since this one knows all of the workings of Lab Rat Mining as he's been part of it since Day 1 from my understanding.


Try to focus on the real issues, not the make believe ones.

The real issue is there's no communication and lack of transparency. Those won't be resolved until the Lawyer is done. A vicious circle it seems.

I call bullshit.  I get not being able to answer how and what to do. . . there is no reason what the problem is and who may or may not be initiating action can not be said prior to how the problem is solved and what will be done about it.

[Bargraphics]

I call bullshit.  I get not being able to answer how and what to do. . . there is no reason what the problem is and who may or may not be initiating action can not be said prior to how the problem is solved and what will be done about it.

Not entirely clear on how to read your sentence, but if I'll try to answer.

I do not know what the issue is with LRM,

I also don't know why nothing can be said although in any business it is usually wise to wait until your lawyer gives you the go ahead to say anything if that's what their opinion is.

[LostDutchman]

I have previously advocated for Lab_Rat and his services.

I have reconsidered and now withdraw my support.

I am sorry if I have caused anyone pain or loss but I was indeed acting on  the best information that I had at the time.

To cause loss was not my intent as I saw Lab_Rat's offerings as a good deal.

I no longer consider them to be so.

I do so wish things were otherwise.

MY $.02.

[BKM]

I call bullshit.  I get not being able to answer how and what to do. . . there is no reason what the problem is and who may or may not be initiating action can not be said prior to how the problem is solved and what will be done about it.

Not entirely clear on how to read your sentence, but if I'll try to answer.

I do not know what the issue is with LRM,

I also don't know why nothing can be said although in any business it is usually wise to wait until your lawyer gives you the go ahead to say anything if that's what their opinion is.

Thanks for giving the rabid masses some bones to gnaw..... maybe we can make soup!

[ICantThinkOfaName]

Worst.

[ICantThinkOfaName]

Lawyer.

[ICantThinkOfaName]

Ever.

[countduckula]

Was it a public defender?...

And Lab_Rat still has the PR skills of a rock.

[sporket]

Alright, over a month now; does anyone still believe that the lawyer, who allegedly works on a new contract really exists?

He exists, I've personally met him.
...

Bargraohics makes it a point to meet and vouch for shady Bitcoiners.  Terrahash, Active Mining, Lab_Rat...  Though the content of his posts varies, research shows that the meaning is universally "yo money's gone."