[BTC-TC] YABMC

[Ukyo]

I would actually be very ecstatic to have a mod just be able to say they looked over all the votes and confirmed that they are all by actual users with a history.
This would be a very meaningful amount of information for everyone.

[1713920523]

1713920523

[1713920523]

1713920523

[1713920523]

1713920523

[1713920523]

1713920523

[Deprived]

I was thinking I am at UTC-5 like Summertime - whoops.

Will extend until 13:00 UTC tomorrow (Wednesday)...

I am going to do a survey via e-mail -- this is too close to call and do not want to have it influenced by people not holding YABMC.

Based on what I have seen, I agree this is the best course of action.

If possible I would ask if any mods would/could be willing to check ALL votes for shills regardless of the email survey.
If there is forum abuse, it should be found out.

I certainly agree doing the vote by email would be best way - that way weighting can be applied (based on number of shares held) as should be done in any share-holder vote.

Whilst I agree, in principle, that finding out if any sock-puppet accounts voted would be desirable I don't think it's actually all that practical.  Mods would have to identify 'suspicious' accounts (e.g. ones registered in last few days) but then have to do a LOT more work to determine whether it's actually a sock-puppet.  How do you prove an account isn't a share-holder?  Do Mods have to be given a list of email addresses of all investors - then ask each account they're suspicious of what email address they used to claim from GLBSE and see if it's on the list?  If someone doesn't want to reveal that are they automatically assumed to be a sock-puppet?

Then what happens IF a sock-puppet account is found?  Say one was found and it voted for BitFunder (or for BTC.CO - works same either way).  How do you determine whether it was voting to help the site it voted for or to discredit it (by making it appear they were supported by sock-puppets)?  And does the account get a scammer tag or banned - for voting in a poll made open to the public?

Having any kind of share-holder vote/poll in a public forum is just a bad idea in the first place.  At least this time burnside's comment made the fact it was terrible obvious - it would actually be far worse if noone mentioned it then one or other party quietly amassed votes with sock-puppets (or legitimate accounts that supported them) without any suspicion of vote-fixing.

[burnside]

I agree that it would be good to see who voted and how.  But as Deprived mentioned, for the purpose of banning socks.

My intent was exactly what I stated initially.  "If you held YABMC" -- It was a clearly worded notification made for the benefit of BTC-Trading Co clients.

That it turned into a circus after that I find immensely depressing.

[Deprived]

I agree that it would be good to see who voted and how.  But as Deprived mentioned, for the purpose of banning socks.

My intent was exactly what I stated initially.  "If you held YABMC" -- It was a clearly worded notification made for the benefit of BTC-Trading Co clients.

That it turned into a circus after that I find immensely depressing.

Problem is that although you clearly said that - noone has any way of knowing whether you meant that or (perhaps more importantly) whether those without YABMC shares but an interest in BTC.CO may, of their own initiative,  choose to vote in favour of BTC.TC in the poll.  But as I mentioned previously it's better it's in the open than being done quietly behind the scenes without anyone even considering the possibility of the vote being rigged (and for all any of us know, the vote may have been illegitimate well before your post).

I'd actually make a case that, in theory, if the best interests of YABMC investors were to be met then a vote such that as this would be best served by having votes not just from investors but also from those who would like to BUY the shares (investors who want to sell are best served by whichever platform will give most buyers).  But that's in no way achievable (no way to determine who genuinely would like to buy) unfortunately.

[burnside]

Problem is that although you clearly said that - noone has any way of knowing whether you meant that or (perhaps more importantly) whether those without YABMC shares but an interest in BTC.CO may, of their own initiative,  choose to vote in favour of BTC.TC in the poll.  But as I mentioned previously it's better it's in the open than being done quietly behind the scenes without anyone even considering the possibility of the vote being rigged (and for all any of us know, the vote may have been illegitimate well before your post).

I'd actually make a case that, in theory, if the best interests of YABMC investors were to be met then a vote such that as this would be best served by having votes not just from investors but also from those who would like to BUY the shares (investors who want to sell are best served by whichever platform will give most buyers).  But that's in no way achievable (no way to determine who genuinely would like to buy) unfortunately.

Exactly why I'm in IT and not Marketing. 

[JWU42]

Sorry for not getting the survey out yet - real life gets in the way sometimes...

[JWU42]

Survey link sent to all YABMC Bondholders - please vote!!!

[JWU42]

Response rate has been very good thus far - nearing 50%...

Thank you again for taking the time to let your opinion be known!

[viboracecata]

Voted

[JWU42]

Accumulated coupons paid to those bondholders that confirmed receipt of test payment after last Friday's payment.  As with last week's payment, this covers coupons through Jan 11th.

b2d056ea1bf4bbcd93f24b9aea076474a660850e6f6f51543e62c58f496f3ac1

I added a public note as many requested to easily track the payment.

[lenny_]

Accumulated coupons paid to those bondholders that confirmed receipt of test payment after last Friday's payment.  As with last week's payment, this covers coupons through Jan 11th.

b2d056ea1bf4bbcd93f24b9aea076474a660850e6f6f51543e62c58f496f3ac1

I added a public note as many requested to easily track the payment.

Payment received, thanks!

I confirmed receiving payment from 11-01-2013. But did not receive latest one. I sent you PM.

[JWU42]

Lenny_,

As stated above, the payment on 18 Jan paid out to those bondholders that did NOT confirm receipt of the test payment before the 11 Jan payout.

If you received a payout on 11 Jan you were NOT supposed to receive a payout on 18 Jan.  As I also mentioned it was for couopns through 11 Jan (of which you had already been paid).

Regular payouts will begin now that the voting is complete (will post about that later today).

[JWU42]

Results of the Survey - YABMC will re-list on BTC-TC as voted on by the bondholders.  Again, I would have preferred this stay private but in light of the circumstances I am willing to succumb to the pressure of the slight majority.



Of note, the 10 other votes had answers that ranged from cryptostocks (5 or 6 votes IIRC) to colored coins to "I have no preference".

I will contact burnside today and start the process of trying to list on BTC-TC.

Sadly, for the bondholders, the 10 BTC bonus offered by Bitfunder is no longer...  

[Graet]

good luck with it all
Cheers
Graet

[JWU42]

Please be advised that I have bought back some shares.  We decided that having the bondholder sign the following message would suffice.

Code:

Signing Address:  
17kVnnc1qpV8QD4hGGV17eNiyqLp7LYter

Message:
JWU42 will pay 19.36 BTC for 968 YABMC shares. Payment will come from BTC address 1konaC6vM9rnMgddosL6AypRNqXoAi8Zt and be sent to 17kVnnc1qpV8QD4hGGV17eNiyqLp7LYter.

HAVrzBRIDWmWuFb+8LybIIz3JyLqr8RZsVHpH2xvj76HpP1TTmyjCLLhaF0GMQvXyVyAs4caP5TwKoRUaczyigA=

ce8e20b9f68746fa4aa7fde4eede81f311a4200f7c6ab5502f48f8a28e0ee15c

This reduces the burden to 32,415 shares (Was 33,383 at time of GLBSE closing) though continuing to pay 60.305% PPS.

[JWU42]

Still waiting on confirmation at BTC-TC...

[usagi]

Still waiting on confirmation at BTC-TC...

It can take a while. For example I've just received a fourth vote on BMF after being up for an entire month. And SILVER only has two votes right now despite having a much better contract. The lesson seems to be that it depends on time more than anything else.

I suspect in your case it will be a faster process than for me ;-) But yes I agree it takes too much time and the voting system will probably end up in the trash bin because most moderators vote irresponsibly. But do your best and be patient I am pretty sure you will be able to list. Why not? YABMC was a pretty big asset. The trading fees would be good for LTC-GLOBAL. That alone should get you in.

[Deprived]

Still waiting on confirmation at BTC-TC...

It's been approved for a few hours - I noticed it in trading list a fe hours back.  Dont know exactly when - probably just after you made this post.

[burnside]

YABMC was a pretty big asset. The trading fees would be good for LTC-GLOBAL. That alone should get you in.

I really hope no one votes based on that.  If they do all my effort for a better platform is a waste.  =/

[BurtW]

Still waiting on confirmation at BTC-TC...

It's been approved for a few hours - I noticed it in trading list a fe hours back.  Dont know exactly when - probably just after you made this post.

So I guess we all get accounts with our shares in them?  How does that work?