|
MrWDunne
|
 |
June 11, 2014, 06:20:29 PM |
|
Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?
Have you asked? Do you know this? you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up. I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors. If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand. I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges. Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aahzman
|
|
June 11, 2014, 06:27:28 PM |
|
I trust Havelock. They've always treated me well, with respect and great customer service. However, the SHA-T IPO from CBCM stinks to high heaven, and I won't be plunking down my hard-earned BTC on it.
|
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 11, 2014, 06:48:41 PM |
|
Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?
Have you asked? Do you know this? you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up. I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors. If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand. I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges. Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything) If security is increasing that is good and I applaud them. he had 3 criminal hits, But your right the boat thing is not that big. But continued criminal misbehavior, could be seen as a disregard for the law and security by some. This is not my belief but it is the belief of others, I just report the facts not interpret them for people. |
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:00:53 PM |
|
Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?
Have you asked? Do you know this? you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up. I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors. If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand. I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges. Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything) If security is increasing that is good and I applaud them. he had 3 criminal hits, But your right the boat thing is not that big. But continued criminal misbehavior, could be seen as a disregard for the law and security by some. This is not my belief but it is the belief of others, I just report the facts not interpret them for people. If its increased it would be even tighter. We did so 6 months ago. What were the others, if I may ask? |
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:10:08 PM |
|
I can not disclose the date due to it being narrowed down by such.
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:12:49 PM |
|
I can not disclose the date due to it being narrowed down by such.
I just meant the charges, not the dates |
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:37:51 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:46:27 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. |
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:51:24 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements? loo. |
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:53:41 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements? loo. No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters. |
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 11, 2014, 07:56:29 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. I was told by someone who listed a IPO with them step by step the process they went through, they even gave me the IPO kit. |
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
June 11, 2014, 08:04:42 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements? loo. No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters. Did you go through such an extensive and intrusive ordeal and then decided not to list? What do you guys have left to chat about, now that Havelock knows all there is to know about you? |
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 08:09:36 PM |
|
they never asked about residents in the same house hold.
My guess would you didn't get far enough. We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us. Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements? loo. No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters. Did you go through such an extensive and intrusive ordeal and then decided not to list? What do you guys have left to chat about, now that Havelock knows all there is to know about you? Obviously who we are is not what the conversation is about. As for why, there were various reasons. None of which are of anyones concern but our own. |
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
June 11, 2014, 08:34:52 PM |
|
You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar). Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern. Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 08:37:22 PM |
|
You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar). Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern. Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?
Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements. And I'm not sure, he may have got himself a new one. |
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
June 11, 2014, 09:04:06 PM |
|
You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar). Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern. Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?
Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements. ... The only thing left is ...couldn't afford the listing fee? |
|
|
|
|
|
MrWDunne
|
|
June 11, 2014, 09:06:42 PM |
|
You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar). Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern. Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?
Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements. ... The only thing left is ...couldn't afford the listing fee? That wasn't it either. |
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 18, 2014, 02:44:20 PM |
|
Looks like SHAT will not fund, wonder why  |
|
|
|
|
RiverBoatBTC (OP)
|
|
June 19, 2014, 03:23:43 PM |
|
SHAT delisted the great mining adventure comes to a end. |
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 19, 2014, 06:42:53 PM |
|
SHAT delisted the great mining adventure comes to a end. Does SHAT Issuer have anything they would like to say about this  |
|
|
|
|
|
