Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 06:24:05 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: The last few days on GLBSE  (Read 2863 times)
BinaryMage
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


Ad astra.


View Profile
April 07, 2012, 02:00:25 AM
 #21

It seems to me that GLBSE or similar can offer real value without verifying companies in any way whatsoever. Let the companies figure out how to build reputations. It might be by levering forum reputation, already running other longstanding business, meeting people in meatspace and pitching your ideas then telling them that they can invest via GLBSE, etc.

As long as the market is clear that they make no promise except that they will care for funds in their control and provide usable software continuously it seems fine too me.

Now if someone found a way to filter for 'non scams' that would be great, but it doesn't have to be the same entity as the market.

To avoid what is essentially spam the exchange could charge a largish fee or deposit for companies before they can make an offering.

+1 to this.

Nefario, you have generally been both professional and responsive, and I have no quarrel with you, but please don't try to put yourself into the role of regulator. It (a) won't work and (b) will destroy GLBSE. More to the point, attempting to regulate Bitcoin goes against the very principles that made Bitcoin what it is.

I agree that Goat's response and behavior were inappropriate, and I understand your desire to protect your shareholders, but protecting against bad investments should not and cannot be your responsibility. Users make the decision to invest, weigh the risk versus reward, and collect the windfall if they pick right and lose a lot if they pick wrong. At GLBSE's beginning both investors and companies were playing rashly, promising things they could not deliver in the case of companies and investing in users who had not demonstrated responsibility in the case of investors. While this resulted in a good amount of pain for everyone involved, it also taught them not to make the same mistakes again. Those who invested in Goat made the choice consciously. They had the necessary information to calculate the potentials of risk and reward. Their investment is their choice and their risk.

I don't feel that you necessarily have to restrict your commenting, nor do I feel that GLBSE has to integrally change. You made what I think you agree was a mistake, took action on that mistake that caused annoyance but no permanent damage, realized you were in the wrong and relented. Goat can hold his grudge if he so desires, but I think the community should and will forgive you on this one, as long as it doesn't happen again.

Charge a fee or deposit if you wish, but don't make it exorbitantly large. One of the great things about GLBSE is how easily a committed entrepreneur with limited capital can launch a company. Ruining that by requiring excessive fees or deposits would make it impossible for many of the companies currently listed on the exchange to exist.

A third party can screen for scammers, but I think having the stock exchange perform that function is a recipe for disaster, as has been seemingly demonstrated in this case. No one should enforce scamming rules, that goes against the point of a distributed system. If a third party screened and provided results to the public, shareholders would have that information in hand when making the decision of whether or not to invest, a decision that should always be theirs.

I'm rather tired and I've been rather long-winded; I hope my points weren't totally obscured. I'd be glad to clarify if necessary. In summary:

(1) Goat's behavior was ridiculous, but...
(2) You cannot and should not regulate this; doing so goes against the very ideal of Bitcoin.
(3) Shareholders reap rewards and should also take the risks.
(4) Don't let this ruin the good parts of GLBSE, notably the ease of launching an IPO.
(5) A third party and not the exchange should screen for scammers.
(6) We (the community) should cut you a little slack as long as this is a one-time occurrence.

-- BinaryMage -- | OTC | PGP
1480832645
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480832645

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480832645
Reply with quote  #2

1480832645
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Nefario
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602


GLBSE Support support@glbse.com


View Profile WWW
April 07, 2012, 02:32:50 AM
 #22

We will attempt to automate user verification as much as possible so that assets that wish to provide this for their shareholders (ID information held by GLBSE on their behalf) as we have currently been doing.

We actually don't want to do this as it's a waste of our time and effort but there ARE NO THIRD PARTIES OFFERING THIS. If there were we would stop immediately and leave it to them.

Business idea, a trusted member of the community starts a ID verification company that does what we have been doing so far, they could get capital for the project by listing on GLBSE, depending on who does it I would even wave the fee.

We will not be creating a rating agency.

We will be creating a prediction market and building it right into GLBSE for all assets issued on GLBSE (and allow the prediction of things outside GLBSE also).

PGP key id at pgp.mit.edu 0xA68F4B7C

To get help and support for GLBSE please email support@glbse.com
Nefario
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602


GLBSE Support support@glbse.com


View Profile WWW
April 07, 2012, 03:11:42 AM
 #23

Nefario, I think you over reacted because of your dealings with Lambert and that’s understandable. You want to keep too many incidents like that from happening on GLBSE but you can’t! No one blames you for Lambert and no one would blame you for Goat if he ended up being a scammer. I will continue to use GLBSE but I would like you to reconsider using your power to control funds like a Bitcoin regulatory agency. That goes against the reason I use Bitcoin. If I wanted frozen funds I’d trade auction-rate securities on Wall Street.

I don't know if you read the OP, I apologised, this means it won't be happening again.

PGP key id at pgp.mit.edu 0xA68F4B7C

To get help and support for GLBSE please email support@glbse.com
mila
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
April 07, 2012, 06:54:42 AM
 #24

Nefario, I think you over reacted because of your dealings with Lambert and that’s understandable. You want to keep too many incidents like that from happening on GLBSE but you can’t! No one blames you for Lambert and no one would blame you for Goat if he ended up being a scammer. I will continue to use GLBSE but I would like you to reconsider using your power to control funds like a Bitcoin regulatory agency. That goes against the reason I use Bitcoin. If I wanted frozen funds I’d trade auction-rate securities on Wall Street.

the part bold is in my opinion at least questionable (read BS). just look at the user that complained about his own actions costing him money. he has sold assets at glbse before getting dividends and also sold cheaper then he bought  ... he would be crying even louder if an asset he owned would turned out be completely worthless.

So what do people suggest as a solution. I see people complaining that GLBSE isn't doing enough, and other people complaining that it is trying to do too much. What's the balance? What needs to happen to make people comfortable? I'd love to hear what people think.

i don't know where to draw the line either. maybe small step to enable asset issuers to promote themselves. let them edit part of the asset description that could be url to a thread/forum, account on facebook, you name it. let people verify for them self and the asset issuer to provide a link. (i see also possible flaws - links edited, removed, pointing to foreign/not-authentic resources; welcome feedback on this)

i think it's impossible to please everyone. keep doing as you think is best, it's you who has to live with the consequences of your actions (and it's your project/server/idea to begin with). if you'd follow external advice against your own accord, you'd be just more disturbed and disappointed.

your ad here:
Sukrim
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
April 07, 2012, 01:24:18 PM
 #25

We actually don't want to do this as it's a waste of our time and effort but there ARE NO THIRD PARTIES OFFERING THIS. If there were we would stop immediately and leave it to them.

Business idea, a trusted member of the community starts a ID verification company that does what we have been doing so far, they could get capital for the project by listing on GLBSE, depending on who does it I would even wave the fee.
The problem is, what makes for example me (without publicly exposing myself a LOT) more trustworthy than anyone else? Writing a couple hundred posts in a niche forum about a niche currency? You'd need a lawyer for this probably and even then people might only trust lawyers from the US/Western Europe...

If on the other hand you have this information, people anyways need to trust you with their money if they want to trade on your platform, so it might be easier for them to also trust that you have verified these IDs.

https://bitfinex.com <-- leveraged trading of BTCUSD, LTCUSD and LTCBTC (long and short) - 10% discount on fees for the first 30 days with this refcode: x5K9YtL3Zb
Mail me at Bitmessage: BM-BbiHiVv5qh858ULsyRDtpRrG9WjXN3xf
Coinoisseur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
April 09, 2012, 09:27:00 AM
 #26

I think a little bit more could be done to make sure people aren't falsely associating GLBSE with the projects/funds listed. Seeing a "Caviat emptor" blurb in the asset area seems like a good idea to me.

I see too much conflicting attitudes, like the one guruvan expressed here. Don't want regulation or government but then suggest you insure against loss, hehe. Not that I want to pick on guruvan. It's one of those traits we humans have to want conflicting things.

Hope you stick it out with GLBSE, Nefario.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!