[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]

[mannybitcoins]

Alright boys, here it is...

A search on Facebook shows "Gerald Slaughter" from Springfield, Missouri.



On his friends list, we see a relative of his, Samantha Slaughter.



Now, reading through her news feed I came across this...




Now there's a familiar name.  Samantha would obviously have Micahs last name, so this is our good friend Micah Slaughter, part of the Slaughter VMC Team.
So why does he use the name "John Smith" on facebook?  Well this is the same john smith that shoes up on Samanthas friends list:




Ahh okay... this is getting VERY interesting... but this is only the start...



Looks like he's showing off a new purchase, sometime around November 5th.  Very nice car, you must have paid a lot for that!
Hey, wait a minute.... that location looks VERY familiar.



Oh hey Ken!  You guys like hanging out in the VMC headquarters?  Can that car mine bitcoins?  Just wondering.. maybe that's the first "Fast Hash Machine".  It sure does look fast!  Not as fast as you're running right now though, I bet...



Haha!  Nothing like showing off your new car by putting yourself in the trunk and pretending to be kidnapped by a muscle car mobster.  Very cute.

[BitCsByBit]

Labcoin 2.0 much? Buy moar shares? Oh, hold on...you can't!

I'm sure everything will work out this year. Only 355 days to go  

[zefyr0s]

Is this business going the way we want it to? Absolutely not. Is it Ken's fault? He gets a lot of the blame here, whether the engineers messed up, or whether they couldn't integrate the new design, either way who chose them? Is this a scam? Absolutely not. You would be incredibly foolish to think that Ken has specifically attempted to scam people out of anything on purpose at all, given how public a company this is. There's so much evidence that the SEC wouldn't have to even say anything, they'd just have to be like "C'mon, really dude? You thought you would get away with this?"

Tensions are high, but to call this a scam would be doing an incredible disservice to reality.

[mannybitcoins]

Is this business going the way we want it to? Absolutely not. Is it Ken's fault? He gets a lot of the blame here, whether the engineers messed up, or whether they couldn't integrate the new design, either way who chose them? Is this a scam? Absolutely not. You would be incredibly foolish to think that Ken has specifically attempted to scam people out of anything on purpose at all, given how public a company this is. There's so much evidence that the SEC wouldn't have to even say anything, they'd just have to be like "C'mon, really dude? You thought you would get away with this?"

Tensions are high, but to call this a scam would be doing an incredible disservice to reality.

So you're saying this isn't a scam because if it were a scam it would be too obvious that it was a scam? Nice.

[hobbymd]

Is this business going the way we want it to? Absolutely not. Is it Ken's fault? He gets a lot of the blame here, whether the engineers messed up, or whether they couldn't integrate the new design, either way who chose them? Is this a scam? Absolutely not. You would be incredibly foolish to think that Ken has specifically attempted to scam people out of anything on purpose at all, given how public a company this is. There's so much evidence that the SEC wouldn't have to even say anything, they'd just have to be like "C'mon, really dude? You thought you would get away with this?"

Tensions are high, but to call this a scam would be doing an incredible disservice to reality.

well "scam" might not be the correct word here, but not telling the investors the whole story about why and when this whole thing turned to mess  is causing a lot people to take extra ordinary measures to make sure this does not turn out to be another labcoin, after all Ken knows himself how does it feel to have coins being taken from you and the person on the other end won't even bother to address the legitimate concerns.

 Lets see how long before this gets deleted

[thefunkybits]

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

[VolanicEruptor]

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"?  Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

[thefunkybits]

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"?  Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

Third party validation of our claims as a company, simple as that. eASIC is a reputable company and they are backing us. Labcoin had nothing but in-house engineers

[VolanicEruptor]

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"?  Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

Third party validation of our claims as a company, simple as that. eASIC is a reputable company and they are backing us. Labcoin had nothing but in-house engineers

If I told you I was assembling computers, and had proof that "eASIC" was supplying me the video cards, and they even had a news release stating that they would supply me, would you be completely confident that I am not scamming you?

We fail to see your reasoning.  Please explain how eASIC is backing us at all?  Perhaps you missed the last weekly update..

[zefyr0s]

Is this business going the way we want it to? Absolutely not. Is it Ken's fault? He gets a lot of the blame here, whether the engineers messed up, or whether they couldn't integrate the new design, either way who chose them? Is this a scam? Absolutely not. You would be incredibly foolish to think that Ken has specifically attempted to scam people out of anything on purpose at all, given how public a company this is. There's so much evidence that the SEC wouldn't have to even say anything, they'd just have to be like "C'mon, really dude? You thought you would get away with this?"

Tensions are high, but to call this a scam would be doing an incredible disservice to reality.

So you're saying this isn't a scam because if it were a scam it would be too obvious that it was a scam? Nice.

Essentially, yes. Even if Ken were lying about knowing the SEC has been already looking into ActM, do you really think they aren't keeping an eye on the bitcoin security world? How out-of-touch do you mistakenly think the SEC are?

[drawingthesun]

This has got out of hand, Ken you have contradicted yourself concerning the shares going online, legal issues, products shipped.

I suggest that you come clean and write a long post about what exactly has been going on over the past 4 months, please make it very detailed and describe failures in detail without pushing blame on others to save face.

You can no longer be silent, you have admitted we have nothing, no boards, do we even have eASIC chips? I suggest you write a very detailed account of the last 4 months events.

If you don't do this the shareholders are going to go insane and hunt you down, the only way to calm the crowd is the be 100% transparent.

I want to know what the hell is going on, and most of the information you're hiding is not covered by NDA and I know that for fact.

Time to tell the truth for once Ken.

Please before the other shareholders begin legal proceedings. You need to give us something.

[zumzero]

Oh my.

[Jasun7211]

Welp...

[zefyr0s]

Ugh. Failing to meet expectations is no evidence of intentional wrongdoing. This is not to say that there is not intentional wrongdoing occurring, just there is no evidence to support an argument in either direction. This absence of information however is the biggest problem I currently see with Active and certainly agree that we should have information be presented much more clearly. Sure, if it is not possible to present such information then explain why. If the explanation fits the realm of plausible occurrence, cool; otherwise we certainly need more fluid conversation with development.

[drawingthesun]

Ugh. Failing to meet expectations is no evidence of intentional wrongdoing. This is not to say that there is not intentional wrongdoing occurring, just there is no evidence to support an argument in either direction. This absence of information however is the biggest problem I currently see with Active and certainly agree that we should have information be presented much more clearly. Sure, if it is not possible to present such information then explain why. If the explanation fits the realm of plausible occurrence, cool; otherwise we certainly need more fluid conversation with development.

I do not believe Ken has done any wrongdoing, it's possible all the contradictions are because events played out that way. but the silence and darkness is now insufferable.

I just want the truth at this point.

[iSnow]

do we even have eASIC chips?

Uhm no, we don't. He has been pretty clear about that (the RTL stuff). The situation is actually much, much worse than I thought.

[drawingthesun]

do we even have eASIC chips?

Uhm no, we don't. He has been pretty clear about that (the RTL stuff). The situation is actually much, much worse than I thought.

Due to huge gaps in my knowledge I am unsure what some of the terms mean.

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

However Ken has said that we are not respining the chip, so I assumed that mean that the chips sort of exist?

I am confused about how we don't need to respin (whatever that means) but we are still working on RTL.

[iSnow]

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

I ain't no chip designer either, but from what I googled, RTL is a high-level description of what the chips is supposed to do. It gets converted to low-level descriptions and those into masks from which the chips are made.

Ken's statement imo indicates that he had an RTL description but it was faulty or underperforming so he finally hired some expert to help him out. What I take from this is that we had sample chips but they were no good and now the design has to be re-cast into silicon.

Someone with more knowledge? Mabs?

[JimmyJazz]

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

I ain't no chip designer either, but from what I googled, RTL is a high-level description of what the chips is supposed to do. It gets converted to low-level descriptions and those into masks from which the chips are made.

Ken's statement imo indicates that he had an RTL description but it was faulty or underperforming so he finally hired some expert to help him out. What I take from this is that we had sample chips but they were no good and now the design has to be re-cast into silicon.

Someone with more knowledge? Mabs?

From what I have learnt - Ken wants a perfect product and won't budge one bit on his thinking.

This could all still be OK depending on the timeline, but it does not fill you with confidence when Ken states he has no clue on the dates. (However probably a lie)

[ffssixtynine]

If ken said units had been delivered to customers, I think it's fair to say full evidence needs to be provided and a full explanation of what has gone wrong since then. You can't claim delivery and then say something obscure about rtl code (which was Ken's task?) and engineering (pcb). Similarly about the extra hashing.

I'm concerned that things went wrong in October or November and that it was then handled badly. At that point I seems to remember seeing irc logs posted showing a very stressed Ken. I have no reason to think this was anything other than failures internally and/or at outsourcers, but one must manage those failures professionally.

One must certainly not mislead customers or investors over the following months.

Ken, I know you have always meant well but this needs an open and frank explanation, very quickly indeed. Both shareholders and buyers have reason to be angry.

For everyone else, Ken is really poor at communication and a lot of this may be down to that. I always found him much better voice than in any written means. I know two posters here are trying to meet/chat to him.