[BitFunder] IceDrill.ASIC IPO (235 Thash Mining Operation powered by HashFast)

[29750f0e1c2fbb3bb]

I'll see what I can do, but I'd like to note that this process is probably costing me more money (in the form of my time) than I will ever receive from icedrill.

Ok. Even though I asked for a specific type of transaction, there are many other ways which also fullfill the "purpose". Namely:
a) two transaction outputs (either combined or separate), incoming or outgoing, to/from the bitfunder address of one of the specified amounts (0.13117745, 0.01311774, 0.00131177, 0.00013117)
b) the bitfunder address should at least show one outgoing transaction at the time or after the claim transaction

How you make that work with your particular wallet software should be a matter of personal preference. I hope the above criterium is broad enough to cover all possible wallet behaviors. In its most simplistic version you'd send two 0.13117745 amounts to your bitfunder address within the same timerange and withdraw them afterwards.

[1714712322]

1714712322

[1714712322]

1714712322

[1714712322]

1714712322

[graymatter7]

This makes no sense to me. Payouts should be to the address of record. If there is no other address of record then it should be to the address used to buy shares in the first instance. These transactions can already be verified on the block chain. No other validation should be needed to satisfy fiduciary responsibility.

I don't know Willem. I don't know 29750f0e1c2fbb3bb. I don't need to. But neither author has done anything here to validate that they can do anything more than waste a reader's time playing games. They've done nothing that would justify anyone playing those games. The only value I can see in this exercise is as entertainment (if you find those sorts of things fun). But I suppose trolling to calculate rates of attrition is another possibility.

Then there are the payouts that are below the threshold for withdrawal. Enough of those in enough different locations and a distribution isn't really a distribution is it?

[babybonobo]

Thank you for the positive step forward and the significantly more bitcoinlike method of dealing with the payouts.

Please understand however that a minority of users of this forum run a "full" wallet program any more, thus I would suspect only a a minority of shareholders are able to follow your instructions. Bear in mind it's not just a simple download at this time and may take days to synch up the 10s of gigabytes of blockchain before becoming functional.

I think it would be simpler therefore to outline a procedure that can be achieved easily with the blockchain.info wallet at least.

Also I am sure that had everyone known that the bitfunder address would end up tied to disparate entities when everything fell apart there, and that operations such as this would be required with it, then a different address and wallet  may have been used in the first place. I believe the only things required at the time were that you could sign messages from it as proof of control. Thus manually creating transactions may not have been a feature of the wallet originally tied to the address.

For myself, I am not tremendously confident messing with the command line, and worry that I can screw my wallet up with a typo. Particularly as the advice often given was asking how to create tx like that here, is "No , don't mess with it unless you know what you're doing" So n00b level info on that is hard to come by.

I couldn't have said it any better myself.  I also agree with what graymatter7 said above.  So much time to waste for a very small percentage of my initial "investment"...sigh...

[Flashman]

This makes no sense to me. Payouts should be to the address of record. If there is no other address of record then it should be to the address used to buy shares in the first instance. These transactions can already be verified on the block chain. No other validation should be needed to satisfy fiduciary responsibility.

Actually, that's not how it worked. You had to fund a wallet run by Ukyo, and then transfer over offchain to bitfunder, then all bitfunder buys and sells were either offchain or coming out of a pooled addy and record keeping done by bitfunder... the bitfunder address the shares were tied to was independant of all this.... most you can prove on blockchain is what you sent to the wallet site, weexchange.


Anyway, we should be all good now, don't have to do 2 in 1 tx, it's a normal receive/send, just do 'em close... that web based rushwallet lets you bounce coin back out of it before confirms, so that might be handy for some.

[lunarboy]

obviously the point here is to avoid paying out to addresses that have given up all hope of any return.  If you keep throwing the ball further away with each pitch eventually the dogs will stop fetching it.

[bobboooiie]

I have no clue how to make double transaction in standard bitcoin client. its not like I just send 2 transaction after each other right ?

[Hoofprint]

Most of us have confirmed our bitfunder address to gain access to the https://www.icedrill.io site, this to me is sufficient claim/proof of activity on that address no?

Crafting odd transactions is not possible with the software I use but i'll be happy to sign my address once again if it is absolutely necessary.  Surely you must appreciate the hoops everyone here has had to go through over the last 18 months. please make this simple.

In simple words the situation is complex. You may have confirmed your claim with willem, but not with me. You can reject this claim process and see what happens during the first payout on 12/1. You will have one year to ponder about what to do after which accounts without payouts are considered dead. Asking for making a transaction from the address you will receive payments on is appropriate. As noted earlier if your wallet software doesn't support multiple outputs, make two transactions within the same timeframe.

I just figured out who 29750f0e1c2fbb3bb is,

Its Eddie from scamfast, you can tell same level of customer support,
Getting answers via PM is like drawing blood from a stone.

Kudos for doubling down on the scam good sir

[29750f0e1c2fbb3bb]

To all which don't receive a reply to a PM I apologize. I simply don't have enough time to perform 1 on 1 customer service. I tried to provide clear instructions for everyone to follow so they can get cleared for receiving payouts and keep them somewhat informed. I am currently consolidating the financials and collecting information about the business practices at ID and compile it in a way for everyone to inspect. Also let me make clear that I am not getting paid for this. I am doing this to provide shareholders with the transparency they need to make an informed assessment of ID after the fact.

There is a lot of data which you don't see and which is hard to communicate given the degree of failure of this fund. Simply put 75% of the fund was destroyed by the actions of HashFast, 10% was wasted on expensive upkeep and a few percent were redirected into refocusing efforts of the business. You may blame current management for failing to serve in the best interest of their shareholders but that doesn't affect the 75% failure.

You'll get numbers and fancy graphics as soon as all transactions are sufficiently annotated. Also sorry for my point-blank tone of conversation - but I don't see any value in sugar coating anything here. Also keep in mind that ID is still involved in recovery actions against HashFast. As long as that process is ongoing it is hard to draw final conclusions.

[Flashman]

Well if we end up owning Simon Barber, can he come cut my lawn once a month or something?

[Dexter770221]

And what about those withdrawal issue on Cryptomex? I understand that Cryptomex is not your domain but you may kick some ass, so they will push that withdrawals thats hang over a month!

[molecular]

I'll see what I can do, but I'd like to note that this process is probably costing me more money (in the form of my time) than I will ever receive from icedrill.

Ok. Even though I asked for a specific type of transaction, there are many other ways which also fullfill the "purpose". Namely:
a) two transaction outputs (either combined or separate), incoming or outgoing, to/from the bitfunder address of one of the specified amounts (0.13117745, 0.01311774, 0.00131177, 0.00013117)
b) the bitfunder address should at least show one outgoing transaction at the time or after the claim transaction

How you make that work with your particular wallet software should be a matter of personal preference. I hope the above criterium is broad enough to cover all possible wallet behaviors. In its most simplistic version you'd send two 0.13117745 amounts to your bitfunder address within the same timerange and withdraw them afterwards.

ok. I think I managed to do what was asked.

Can we see a list of 'verified' addresses at some point so we can make sure our processes worked?

[graymatter7]

To all which don't receive a reply to a PM I apologize. I simply don't have enough time to perform 1 on 1 customer service. I tried to provide clear instructions for everyone to follow so they can get cleared for receiving payouts and keep them somewhat informed...

<stuff moved>

Your instructions seem to require additional expense. How is that in the best interest of the shareholders? Please provide instructions that don't incur expenses/fees.

Further, what is the point of correlating two transactions to an address of record you already have? Again, this makes little sense to me.

I am currently consolidating the financials and collecting information about the business practices at ID and compile it in a way for everyone to inspect. Also let me make clear that I am not getting paid for this.

<stuff deleted>

It is lovely that you are in a position to collect information about the ID business practices. Of course, we're not getting paid either.

[raskul]

To all which don't receive a reply to a PM I apologize. I simply don't have enough time to perform 1 on 1 customer service. I tried to provide clear instructions for everyone to follow so they can get cleared for receiving payouts and keep them somewhat informed...

<stuff moved>

Your instructions seem to require additional expense. How is that in the best interest of the shareholders? Please provide instructions that don't incur expenses/fees.

Further, what is the point of correlating two transactions to an address of record you already have? Again, this makes little sense to me.

I am currently consolidating the financials and collecting information about the business practices at ID and compile it in a way for everyone to inspect. Also let me make clear that I am not getting paid for this.

<stuff deleted>

It is lovely that you are in a position to collect information about the ID business practices. Of course, we're not getting paid either.

...like, using his victims to help him launder money? smart.

[Mythoranium]

I get people throwing signatures at me. While I can do some manual verification please be so kind and create the transaction I asked you to if you want to claim your address. You don't even have to contact me as the transaction and the bitfunder address listing is publicly visible.

I have created a sample transaction for everyone to inspect:
https://blockchain.info/tx/b6f8e59b0b21bcb58619c15f19bd7b29c09d0750eaaf43bb4da498ed70cf1447

It contains TWO 0.13117745 outputs. This is the clue for me. As stated before, if you want to submit a lesser amount of BTC I am also looking for a pair of either of the following amounts:
0.01311774,0.01311774
0.00131177,0.00131177
0.00013117,0.00013117

I might be a retard, since noone has asked this question yet, but how is this an example transaction? All I see on your linked transaction is a single amount of 0.2993 BTC transferred from an address to itself. At first I thought that maybe blockchain.info consolidates identical outputs, but even then — 0.2993 is not even a multiple of 0.13117745. I don't see TWO outputs, I don't see the specified amount — for me it seems to be just a random transaction.

Could anyone explain to me what I am missing here?

Also, you said you will also accept two transactions of the specified amount "in the same timeframe". What is this timeframe? A minute? Same block? A century?

Thank you in advance and I'm glad this thing finally seems to be moving forward.

[DiamondCardz]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=40976;sa=showPosts

That last post date...the community needs to stop blindly investing in things just because a trusted name is behind it. Because that failed magnificently, didn't it?

[Bargraphics]

I get people throwing signatures at me. While I can do some manual verification please be so kind and create the transaction I asked you to if you want to claim your address. You don't even have to contact me as the transaction and the bitfunder address listing is publicly visible.

I have created a sample transaction for everyone to inspect:
https://blockchain.info/tx/b6f8e59b0b21bcb58619c15f19bd7b29c09d0750eaaf43bb4da498ed70cf1447

It contains TWO 0.13117745 outputs. This is the clue for me. As stated before, if you want to submit a lesser amount of BTC I am also looking for a pair of either of the following amounts:
0.01311774,0.01311774
0.00131177,0.00131177
0.00013117,0.00013117

I might be a retard, since noone has asked this question yet, but how is this an example transaction? All I see on your linked transaction is a single amount of 0.2993 BTC transferred from an address to itself. At first I thought that maybe blockchain.info consolidates identical outputs, but even then — 0.2993 is not even a multiple of 0.13117745. I don't see TWO outputs, I don't see the specified amount — for me it seems to be just a random transaction.

Could anyone explain to me what I am missing here?

Also, you said you will also accept two transactions of the specified amount "in the same timeframe". What is this timeframe? A minute? Same block? A century?

Thank you in advance and I'm glad this thing finally seems to be moving forward.

Going to take a crack at answering this.

Enable Advanced Mode - https://blockchain.info/tx/b6f8e59b0b21bcb58619c15f19bd7b29c09d0750eaaf43bb4da498ed70cf1447?show_adv=true

You'll see 3 outputs.

1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.13117745 BTC
1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.13117745 BTC
1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.0369451 BTC

The last output I believe is change.


I also believe "in the same timeframe" is a single block confirmation but honestly could be wrong here.

[Flashman]

I also believe "in the same timeframe" is a single block confirmation but honestly could be wrong here.

Bugger, might have to redo, pushed out two separate tx, but they ended up in different blocks.

That list of confirmed addresses would be handy.....

[Mythoranium]

Going to take a crack at answering this.

Enable Advanced Mode - https://blockchain.info/tx/b6f8e59b0b21bcb58619c15f19bd7b29c09d0750eaaf43bb4da498ed70cf1447?show_adv=true

You'll see 3 outputs.

1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.13117745 BTC
1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.13117745 BTC
1V2PqZ1r1q3kR3wsXon8KSpRzKTLr2Q4j - (Unspent) 0.0369451 BTC

The last output I believe is change.


I also believe "in the same timeframe" is a single block confirmation but honestly could be wrong here.

Thank you very much, this explains it. I had no idea blockchain.info had an "advanced mode".

[29750f0e1c2fbb3bb]

I also believe "in the same timeframe" is a single block confirmation but honestly could be wrong here.

Bugger, might have to redo, pushed out two separate tx, but they ended up in different blocks.

That list of confirmed addresses would be handy.....

I'll post a listing with confirmed claimed addresses soon. Also the transactions don't need to be included in the same block. I relaxed the description of how to show "proof by transaction" quite a bit. Within same timeframe means sufficiently close in the block chain to infer correlation between these two transactions. If a bus hits me tomorrow or an external entity needs to review the claims process, they should be able to deduce it from inspecting the transactions on the address either programmatically or manually.

[Dexter770221]

Still it's impossible to send anything when wallet balance ==0.
What about my 0.1 BTC withdrawal request from 2nd Oct? Without that I can't do anything.
Or maybe there will be someone nice to loan me 0.1 BTC. I will give back in ~1hour.