Gigamining / Teramining

[MPOE-PR]

Will people who buy MPEX shares be liable if Mr Popescu shuts down and runs off with everyones coins ?

Ah, what a tangled web we weave. GLBSE shareholder means not the same as MPEx shareholder, and if you indemnify shareholders what exactly do you expect from customers?

But otherwise, re-read this.

[18:41:06] shareholder1 So theres literally nothing we can do

Welll....

[Brunic]

Theory like that.

Let's suppose Nefario removed some real asset holders from the list, to put false information for addresses controlled by him.  Based on the data GLBSE requested to make an account, it's probably a bunch of usernames with BTC address and assets ID. It's not that hard for Nefario to create a dozen of BTC addresses and simply change some of the address in the list. What happen if gigavps blindly follow the list without any verification?

Don't forget Nefario IS a scammer and has proven himself untrustworthy.

I don't own any gigamining assets, I'm simply looking at that and consider that gigavps is in a "damned if you, damned if you don't" situation.

From what you are stating, how does providing all this personal information resolve the issue of a corrupt list exactly ? He only has a list with 3 pieces of information, which could have all been changed by Nefario.

I think James' rent-a-lawyer needs to respond to this query, quite a few have asked it. Why should we all waste time and money on resolving this if its not even plausible

Well, if you try to make a false claim submitting all the info required, it's not going to be that hard to sue you back. It's a way to protect you legally. Also, Nefario could not create 5-6 ID for his different claims, so it prevent that possibility.

Also, if I wanted to scam gigavps by making a false claim, I would simply submit my claim and be very vocal on this forum. It's a cheap way to make pressure on him and maybe force a mistake. If it doesn't work, well, there's not much to lose, since proving a false claim is almost impossible right now.

I'm not accusing anybody, just trying to offer different perspective to this incredible mess.

[miscreanity]

In this sense, the models are not significantly different: they both try to solve a situation as best possible. You are arguing for one rather than the other, which is fine. The OP not picking your favorite is not necessarily a crime: the model he did pick has significant advantages (it is legally sound, for one; it allows the users themselves to choose whether they want to be slaughtered or not, as opposed to just "Oops, you hadn't stamped a card on Aug 17th? Ah well, poopy for you" for another).

I would agree entirely if there were no chain of ownership information whatsoever. Since there is a list that apparently has at least some valid information, it could be argued as irresponsible and to the detriment of shareholders if it weren't used fully.

The problem, however, is that whether you accept it or not is irrelevant. You're not the standard to measure this by. I'm not either, nor is anyone else (or even, "everyone else", as in, all the F in corpus).

A good representation of the kernel of the problem is right here: we used to have a measuring stick. It burned. Now we have no measuring stick.

Correct, but we do have different classes as you've pointed out. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, and treating all of them the same is a disservice. Due to the circumstances, both solutions would be necessary to afford the best chance for as many shareholders to be accommodated as possible. If giga wants to enforce the current solution afterward, at least there will be an option of parting ways.

As far as giga's situation, I can understand the difficulty. At the same time, there is the ability to handle claims on a case-by-case basis without resorting to disclosure of private information for all owners. Some additional work now can speed the transition to a single solution. For example: if a shareholder has assets with multiple issuers, the information can be cross-referenced by issuers with the shareholder's permission. This still relies upon nefario's list being valid, but it reduces the chance of independent fraud from the client side.

[fcmatt]

Theory like that.

Let's suppose Nefario removed some real asset holders from the list, to put false information for addresses controlled by him.  Based on the data GLBSE requested to make an account, it's probably a bunch of usernames with BTC address and assets ID. It's not that hard for Nefario to create a dozen of BTC addresses and simply change some of the address in the list. What happen if gigavps blindly follow the list without any verification?

Don't forget Nefario IS a scammer and has proven himself untrustworthy.

I don't own any gigamining assets, I'm simply looking at that and consider that gigavps is in a "damned if you, damned if you don't" situation.

From what you are stating, how does providing all this personal information resolve the issue of a corrupt list exactly ? He only has a list with 3 pieces of information, which could have all been changed by Nefario.

I think James' rent-a-lawyer needs to respond to this query, quite a few have asked it. Why should we all waste time and money on resolving this if its not even plausible

Well, if you try to make a false claim submitting all the info required, it's not going to be that hard to sue you back. It's a way to protect you legally. Also, Nefario could not create 5-6 ID for his different claims, so it prevent that possibility.

Also, if I wanted to scam gigavps by making a false claim, I would simply submit my claim and be very vocal on this forum. It's a cheap way to make pressure on him and maybe force a mistake. If it doesn't work, well, there's not much to lose, since proving a false claim is almost impossible right now.

I'm not accusing anybody, just trying to offer different perspective to this incredible mess.

Any way i look at it, James will come out on top with the SC mini rigs he acquires from this incredible mess.

And that was the plan from the beginning. To make money off bitcoin suckers.. Er users. A virtual land rush of opportunity for the early to bilk users on this security nonsense when none was needed.

Users should demand their money back in the best way for them to hurt the operator who is now withholding money owed. Did he not already default on payments? Or him pooling up profits is ok with everyone and changing terms to get it legit?

Bankrupt his operation and make it hurt his wallet instead of yours. Get together into one group and make demands. Put the pressure on. Contact bfl and tell them product is being bought with stolen money.

[jamesg]

hurt the operator

How does hurting me solve anything?

Did he not already default on payments?

The only reasons payments stopped was because GLBSE shut down. I actually sent in 500 BTC to GLBSE hours before they closed for the next weeks coupon payment.

Or him pooling up profits is ok with everyone and changing terms to get it legit?

GLBSE changed the terms by closing.

Bankrupt his operation and make it hurt his wallet instead of yours.

Bankrupting me is not going to get Gigaminers their coupon payments.

You seem to ignore all of the points that I have made regarding why a claims process even exists.

Are you only here to troll?

[finkleshnorts]

Are you only here to troll?

Either way, he's certainly a social deviant.

[jamesg]

Stop trying to place blame on GLBSE, its your negligence and by taking the legal route you are just making things worse for yourself, if you have to spend 1000s on legal fees and hours in court then thats what's going to happen.

As someone else stated you could have worked this out partially on a case by case basis, I'm.sure you know people who you can resolve with without lawyer intervention

EDIT: you state that you cannot verifiy the list nefario gave you, so can I ask why you placed trust in him and his platform to host your contract and all of a sudden decide not to trust him? Again this is your negligence.

You also seems to not read anything I write. The list is a starting point. The list needs to be verified. I need to have legal recourse if things go awry. This is to protect all Gigaminers.

The lawyer is involved so people can trust that their information can be held in confidence. It is a lawyer's sworn duty to uphold laws and play by the rules.

Please look past your blinding anger and try to see another point of view.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Will people who buy MPEX shares be liable if Mr Popescu shuts down and runs off with everyones coins ?

Ah, what a tangled web we weave. GLBSE shareholder means not the same as MPEx shareholder, and if you indemnify shareholders what exactly do you expect from customers?

But otherwise, re-read this.

[18:41:06] shareholder1 So theres literally nothing we can do

Welll....

No one signed the bylaws or any partnership contract.

You being a lover of gpg contracts can understand perfectly what that means.

[boonies4u]

Stop trying to place blame on GLBSE, its your negligence and by taking the legal route you are just making things worse for yourself, if you have to spend 1000s on legal fees and hours in court then thats what's going to happen.

As someone else stated you could have worked this out partially on a case by case basis, I'm.sure you know people who you can resolve with without lawyer intervention

EDIT: you state that you cannot verifiy the list nefario gave you, so can I ask why you placed trust in him and his platform to host your contract and all of a sudden decide not to trust him? Again this is your negligence.

You also seems to not read anything I write. The list is a starting point. The list needs to be verified. I need to have legal recourse if things go awry. This is to protect all Gigaminers.

The lawyer is involved so people can trust that their information can be held in confidence. It is a lawyer's sworn duty to uphold laws and play by the rules.

Please look past your blinding anger and try to see another point of view.

Best of luck to you Giga and all the shareholders. I didn't happen to hold any gigamining shares at the time of shutdown, but it could just as easily be me in the same boat.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Stop trying to place blame on GLBSE, its your negligence and by taking the legal route you are just making things worse for yourself, if you have to spend 1000s on legal fees and hours in court then thats what's going to happen.

As someone else stated you could have worked this out partially on a case by case basis, I'm.sure you know people who you can resolve with without lawyer intervention

EDIT: you state that you cannot verifiy the list nefario gave you, so can I ask why you placed trust in him and his platform to host your contract and all of a sudden decide not to trust him? Again this is your negligence.

You also seems to not read anything I write. The list is a starting point. The list needs to be verified. I need to have legal recourse if things go awry. This is to protect all Gigaminers.

The lawyer is involved so people can trust that their information can be held in confidence. It is a lawyer's sworn duty to uphold laws and play by the rules.

Please look past your blinding anger and try to see another point of view.

Why should you personally benefit because people cant claim their shares.

What are you going to do with the leftover shares that people cant claim. Even if it goes to the fucking bitcoin foundation its better than you putting it in your own pocket.

You walk away with all the equipment and all their future coins it generates. What are you going to do to address this ?

[Daily Anarchist]

Stop trying to place blame on GLBSE, its your negligence and by taking the legal route you are just making things worse for yourself, if you have to spend 1000s on legal fees and hours in court then thats what's going to happen.

As someone else stated you could have worked this out partially on a case by case basis, I'm.sure you know people who you can resolve with without lawyer intervention

EDIT: you state that you cannot verifiy the list nefario gave you, so can I ask why you placed trust in him and his platform to host your contract and all of a sudden decide not to trust him? Again this is your negligence.

You also seems to not read anything I write. The list is a starting point. The list needs to be verified. I need to have legal recourse if things go awry. This is to protect all Gigaminers.

The lawyer is involved so people can trust that their information can be held in confidence. It is a lawyer's sworn duty to uphold laws and play by the rules.

Please look past your blinding anger and try to see another point of view.

Why should you personally benefit because people cant claim their shares.

What are you going to do with the leftover shares that people cant claim. Even if it goes to the fucking bitcoin foundation its better than you putting it in your own pocket.

You walk away with all the equipment and all their future coins it generates. What are you going to do to address this ?

I sort of expected this to be one of the questions that gets answered on Monday.

Obviously, I can only speak for myself, but I only had a few shares and I'm one of those people who isn't going to jump through a bunch of hoops and spend money on notaries just to get a few measly coins back. I'd much rather see my money to go the Bitcoin foundation.

[finkleshnorts]

I wonder, out of curiosity, how many of the 10% Gigavps mentioned were "reputable" forum members vs. freeloading new members. Sorry to all for this mess.

[jamesg]

I'd much rather see my money to go the Bitcoin foundation.

If some people are unwilling to release their personal details and would rather sign a message with the associated btc address invalidating their claim, I think that those coins can be donated to the Bitcoin Foundation.

This is not an unreasonable request and I will speak with counsel to see if something like this can work.

[fcmatt]

Seems to me if glcrapbse failed the operator should buy back all bonds at issue price and pay out divs to the day they are bought back in btc. Recall the operator disliked mixing in fiat. So 1 btc back then, 1 btc today. No way to determine fair price on active market.. Thus use issue price.
That seems fair.

[Deprived]

I'd much rather see my money to go the Bitcoin foundation.

If some people are unwilling to release their personal details and would rather sign a message with the associated btc address invalidating their claim, I think that those coins can be donated to the Bitcoin Foundation.

This is not an unreasonable request and I will speak with counsel to see if something like this can work.

That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

If you're willing to send the money to Bitcoin Foundation if they sign the message with their BTC address, then why can't they just do that and then you send THEM the bitcoins?  That's totally and utterly inconsistent.

[jamesg]

That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

If you're willing to send the money to Bitcoin Foundation if they sign the message with their BTC address, then why can't they just do that and then you send THEM the bitcoins?  That's totally and utterly inconsistent.

Please Deprived, since you have a horse in this race, why don't you just armchair quarterback the whole situation and we'll let you get all of the nastygrams.

It's an idea, someone else's idea.

[fcmatt]

I'd much rather see my money to go the Bitcoin foundation.

If some people are unwilling to release their personal details and would rather sign a message with the associated btc address invalidating their claim, I think that those coins can be donated to the Bitcoin Foundation.

This is not an unreasonable request and I will speak with counsel to see if something like this can work.

That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

If you're willing to send the money to Bitcoin Foundation if they sign the message with their BTC address, then why can't they just do that and then you send THEM the bitcoins?  That's totally and utterly inconsistent.

heh.

[theGECK]

He was paying out before.. Why is he not paying out now? Did the bitcoin addresses go bad when glcrapbse went down?

Yes and to expand all the information required to determine the payments/ownership of the bonds is contained in the payments made that are in the blockchain. It should be simple enough to continue the payments due based on list of address in already sent payments since those are based on the bonds owned by that address you have your ownership determined.. Too simple a solution with not enough scam potential in it so probably why it was not thought of to be used.

I never took my BTC outside of GLBSE and therefore never entered the blockchain with my dividends. I would be unable to verify ownership because nothing was ever paid to me - from gigamining or GLBSE.

[Daily Anarchist]

That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

If you're willing to send the money to Bitcoin Foundation if they sign the message with their BTC address, then why can't they just do that and then you send THEM the bitcoins?  That's totally and utterly inconsistent.

Please Deprived, since you have a horse in this race, why don't you just armchair quarterback the whole situation and we'll let you get all of the nastygrams.

It's an idea, someone else's idea.

I think the point he's making is that if you're willing to send coins somewhere, ANYWHERE, based on btc address sig alone, why isn't it enough to do for all of the addresses. I mean, it is entirely possible that Nefario created a bunch of small accounts where users will claim to be legitimate, and then trick you into sending coins to the Bitcoin Foundation.

Perhaps this is all a Bitcoin Foundation long con after all???

[fcmatt]

He was paying out before.. Why is he not paying out now? Did the bitcoin addresses go bad when glcrapbse went down?

Yes and to expand all the information required to determine the payments/ownership of the bonds is contained in the payments made that are in the blockchain. It should be simple enough to continue the payments due based on list of address in already sent payments since those are based on the bonds owned by that address you have your ownership determined.. Too simple a solution with not enough scam potential in it so probably why it was not thought of to be used.

I never took my BTC outside of GLBSE and therefore never entered the blockchain with my dividends. I would be unable to verify ownership because nothing was ever paid to me - from gigamining or GLBSE.

then there would be leftover btc to pay these people. at least you do not put a burden on everyone. just the people in edge cases.