Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 05:59:15 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 »
  Print  
Author Topic: SkepsiDyne Integrated Node - The Bitcoin Mining Company  (Read 92688 times)
Tawsix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


I have always been afraid of banks.


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 03:08:22 AM
 #761

I thought the plan was to have one motion decide.

just so everyone is clear what has been proposed by SDM is an absoprtion of all SIN assests, all equipment operational or otherwise as well as any information will be transfered from SIN to SDM and after relocation to a SDM location and evaluation/restoration(as needed) to operate as originally intended.
So we have two proposed options then:
1)  All rigs are sold for cash to whomever, and the cash is distributed to shareholders proportional to their LEGITIMATE shares.
2)  SDM takes over the mining operations by physically acquiring the rigs, though they are still owned by the shareholders.

This is correct, and once I get my client updated I will set forth a motion concerning these matters.

I thought the absorption has already been discussed and has been determined as the ideal alternative. Then again, you (Tawsix) havent really discussed it yourself, even going to the point of saying shakaru was disinterested in the idea of absorption.

I said that he was not interested in buying the assets.

sell the assets to shakaru

He has already stated he is not interested in that arrangement.

There have been maybe six or seven shareholders who have been expressing their opinions in this thread to allow for absorption, one of which would be the one acquiring SIN's assets.  I do not think this is a good sample, so I do not think it is wise to make this vote a dichotomy of either liquidation or absorption.  Just because we have had one offer does not mean it is the only one we can get, or the best one for the company.

1480787955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480787955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480787955
Reply with quote  #2

1480787955
Report to moderator
1480787955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480787955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480787955
Reply with quote  #2

1480787955
Report to moderator
1480787955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480787955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480787955
Reply with quote  #2

1480787955
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480787955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480787955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480787955
Reply with quote  #2

1480787955
Report to moderator
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 03:16:27 AM
 #762

I thought the plan was to have one motion decide.

just so everyone is clear what has been proposed by SDM is an absoprtion of all SIN assests, all equipment operational or otherwise as well as any information will be transfered from SIN to SDM and after relocation to a SDM location and evaluation/restoration(as needed) to operate as originally intended.
So we have two proposed options then:
1)  All rigs are sold for cash to whomever, and the cash is distributed to shareholders proportional to their LEGITIMATE shares.
2)  SDM takes over the mining operations by physically acquiring the rigs, though they are still owned by the shareholders.

This is correct, and once I get my client updated I will set forth a motion concerning these matters.

I thought the absorption has already been discussed and has been determined as the ideal alternative. Then again, you (Tawsix) havent really discussed it yourself, even going to the point of saying shakaru was disinterested in the idea of absorption.

I said that he was not interested in buying the assets.

sell the assets to shakaru

He has already stated he is not interested in that arrangement.

There have been maybe six or seven shareholders who have been expressing their opinions in this thread to allow for absorption, one of which would be the one acquiring SIN's assets.  I do not think this is a good sample, so I do not think it is wise to make this vote a dichotomy of either liquidation or absorption.  Just because we have had one offer does not mean it is the only one we can get, or the best one for the company.

If you will list the assets maybe others could make offers.  There probably is someone who is willing to offer a dividend to shareholders as well as take control of the equipment and operate it for a small percentage of proceeds.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:33:19 AM
 #763

Sorry, I misread what you were referring to regarding assets.

I don't know what "better" offer regarding absorption could appear. As long as my shares do not lose value and there is a competent person running the rigs, I consider it a non-issue what absorbs SIN. Has anyone made any offer to absorb SIN other than Shades Minoco?

Technically the only shareholder I am certain is taking a part in this discussion is you, Tawsix( and myself).
This is a public discussion. Whether or not I think we should continue to discuss absorption should depend on how many shares of the IPO votes regarding the liquidation. If it is a low number, I think a dummy motion should be created pointing to a private discussion (password or link protected access).

If not that, then I think we need to find another way to prove who has shares, if we need to continue to discuss.

I just thought we were going to be having one motion up for 5 days, but it seems like it may be weeks before we come to a decision.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:37:17 AM
 #764

Sorry, I misread what you were referring to regarding assets.

I don't know what "better" offer regarding absorption could appear. As long as my shares do not lose value and there is a competent person running the rigs, I consider it a non-issue what absorbs SIN. Has anyone made any offer to absorb SIN other than Shades Minoco?

Technically the only shareholder I am certain is taking a part in this discussion is you, Tawsix( and myself).
This is a public discussion. Whether or not I think we should continue to discuss absorption should depend on how many shares of the IPO votes regarding the liquidation. If it is a low number, I think a dummy motion should be created pointing to a private discussion (password or link protected access).

If not that, then I think we need to find another way to prove who has shares, if we need to continue to discuss.

I just thought we were going to be having one motion up for 5 days, but it seems like it may be weeks before we come to a decision.

No other offer has been made as far as I know.  My point was simply that it's unreasonable to expect there to be other offers when he won't tell us what the assets are exactly.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:49:36 AM
 #765

Sorry, I was talking to Tawsix. I was trying to say "you" like this :

"You, Tawsix, are..."

NOT like :

"You, Tawsix, and myself..."

Sorry if my grammar failed 3:



sanchaz
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 90


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 10:34:11 AM
 #766

+1 Shades Minoco to absorb SIN

AND CAN WE PLEASE GET AN ASSETS LIST!?
Is it so hard?
You Tawsix keep avoiding this issue at all cost I wonder why...
SIN is over your argument of keeping the assets a secret is no longer valid!

Anonymous Cash-By-Mail Exchange: https://www.bitcoin2cash.com
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 10:45:43 AM
 #767

+1 Shades Minoco to absorb SIN

AND CAN WE PLEASE GET AN ASSETS LIST!?
Is it so hard?
You Tawsix keep avoiding this issue at all cost I wonder why...
SIN is over your argument of keeping the assets a secret is no longer valid!

Obivous scam is obvious. Saying he has $1000 of equipment but only claiming $500 etc.
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:49:22 PM
 #768

So let me get this straight.

Tawsix the scammer still refuses to actually list what hardware has been purchased.

Tawsix the scammer initiated a vote on GLBSE to either liquidate the assets or let someone else take control of them.

Tawsix the scammer has given himself an equal number of shares as have been issued to everyone else, which means that whatever he wants to happen, will happen.

Likely, he'll vote his shares towards liquidating the assets, so no one else has a chance to see them.  That vote will win, of course, since he owns half the shares already.  The best we could hope for on the absorption front is EVERYONE else votes for it, but it would have to be every single shareholder, and it would only result in a tie.  Maybe he gave himself one extra share just so he could be sure he wins the vote.

So, liquidation will win.  He'll say he got X dollars for liquidating the assets, which may or may not be the truth - he won't give the details.  It'll be paid out in the form of BTC to the shareholders.  We'll never know what assets were actually owned, whether he pocketed some of the money raised by shareholders (which seems fairly likely at this point), whether the assets were liquidated at a fair and reasonable price, or whether he pocketed some of the money raised by liquidating some of the assets.


And that is exactly what he wants.


For anyone who still wants to fight him on this, he ILLEGALLY gave himself a larger share of the company.  He wrote a contract, then broke that contract by issuing shares to himself that he did not earn according to the terms of the contract, and that is the best point of contention I can find.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:52:34 PM
 #769

So, liquidation will win.  He'll say he got X dollars for liquidating the assets, which may or may not be the truth - he won't give the details.  It'll be paid out in the form of BTC to the shareholders.  We'll never know what assets were actually owned, whether he pocketed some of the money raised by shareholders (which seems fairly likely at this point), whether the assets were liquidated at a fair and reasonable price, or whether he pocketed some of the money raised by liquidating some of the assets.

I guess you could demand to see Bill of sale.  I mean if it is sold on ebay that leaves a record.  If he sells the "equipment" (which may have never been purchased to begin with) to someone on this forum they can confirm it. 

If he claims he sold it to some anonymous person without any proof well hopefully he gets scammer tag for life.
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 04:57:27 PM
 #770

So, liquidation will win.  He'll say he got X dollars for liquidating the assets, which may or may not be the truth - he won't give the details.  It'll be paid out in the form of BTC to the shareholders.  We'll never know what assets were actually owned, whether he pocketed some of the money raised by shareholders (which seems fairly likely at this point), whether the assets were liquidated at a fair and reasonable price, or whether he pocketed some of the money raised by liquidating some of the assets.

I guess you could demand to see Bill of sale.  I mean if it is sold on ebay that leaves a record.  If he sells the "equipment" (which may have never been purchased to begin with) to someone on this forum they can confirm it. 

If he claims he sold it to some anonymous person without any proof well hopefully he gets scammer tag for life.
We've been demanding things all along that he has ignored.  We've been demanding a list of hardware, detail on purchase price of said hardware, etc.  He hasn't given any of that to us, so I doubt he'd comply with a demand to see bill(s) of sale.

I agree that he should get scammer tag for life though.  UNLESS he actually shows what was purchased on what dates, for how much, and it matches up with the information we already have about shares sold and BTC raised.
shakaru
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile WWW
November 17, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
 #771

I have started the motion concerning the liquidation of SIN, it's ID is 62 (I made a test motion with ID 61 to make sure everything was working correctly, so just ignore that one).  The motion text is as follows:

Code:
Vote Start: Wednesday November 16, 2011 - 9:00 PM
Vote End: Tuesday November 22, 2011 - 12:00 AM
Vote Num: 000006
Vote issue: Wrapping up and liquidation of SIN

This vote is being held to determine the shareholders' opinions
on the matter of wrapping up SIN and liquidating its assets. 

A vote in favor (yes) will support the wrapping up and liquidation of SIN.

A vote against (no) will be against the wrapping up and liquidation of SIN.

Voting will go until midnight the 22nd of November.  Hopefully this will be enough time for the majority of investors to vote.

Why is there no vote for asborbtion like we have discussed? Also, where is the hardware manifest we have been told about? I growing very tired of your dealings. Put up the damn motion like you said.

SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 05:41:37 PM
 #772

how many shares does Tawsix have ?

I voted no, i did not see option for Shakaru to take over
That's my point - he has the same number of shares as all the other shareholders put together.  However he votes is what will happen.
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 05:51:42 PM
 #773

I have started the motion concerning the liquidation of SIN, it's ID is 62 (I made a test motion with ID 61 to make sure everything was working correctly, so just ignore that one).  The motion text is as follows:

Code:
Vote Start: Wednesday November 16, 2011 - 9:00 PM
Vote End: Tuesday November 22, 2011 - 12:00 AM
Vote Num: 000006
Vote issue: Wrapping up and liquidation of SIN

This vote is being held to determine the shareholders' opinions
on the matter of wrapping up SIN and liquidating its assets. 

A vote in favor (yes) will support the wrapping up and liquidation of SIN.

A vote against (no) will be against the wrapping up and liquidation of SIN.

Voting will go until midnight the 22nd of November.  Hopefully this will be enough time for the majority of investors to vote.

Why is there no vote for asborbtion like we have discussed? Also, where is the hardware manifest we have been told about? I growing very tired of your dealings. Put up the damn motion like you said.

For a second Tawsix actually convinced me to back down on starting the motion on whether or not to Shades Minoco should absorb SIN.  Though, seeing how he has failed to give us hardware info, and seeing that i'm not the only one pushed a little too far, I think I will keep on him about the whole mess.  I need to stay focused.

how many shares does Tawsix have ?

I voted no, i did not see option for Shakaru to take over
That's my point - he has the same number of shares as all the other shareholders put together.  However he votes is what will happen.

I would like to first see Tawsix admit that he should have a lower share count, and show the calculation for how many shares he holds. Did he actually award himself more shares, or was he just collecting profits as if he had?

Secondly, before we go any farther we need to know what the company assets are, so we can best decide what to do with them.

We don't know if he actually gave himself those shares or not, or if he was just taking half of the dividends for himself, before sending rest out to shareholders. Given that it appears he has already made up his mind, and hasn't paid for 50%+1 shares, I hope that he doesn't vote on these/this motion(s)

How many shares Tawsix were to receive if an absorption were to happen, needs to be worked out with him and shakaru. I personally think that he should receive shares based on the amount of money reinvested from dividends. I believe remuneration should not be a factor, given how poorly he has run SIN.
JL421
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 146


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:06:01 PM
 #774

Well lets see here, there are 10,000 issues shares, how many were sold? The rest are what Tawsix owns.
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:06:18 PM
 #775

We don't know if he actually gave himself those shares or not, or if he was just taking half of the dividends for himself, before sending rest out to shareholders. Given that it appears he has already made up his mind, and hasn't paid for 50%+1 shares, I hope that he doesn't vote on these/this motion(s)

How many shares Tawsix were to receive if an absorption were to happen, needs to be worked out with him and shakaru. I personally think that he should receive shares based on the amount of money reinvested from dividends. I believe remuneration should not be a factor, given how poorly he has run SIN.
Good point. I hope I am wrong that he gave himself an equal number of shares, and instead, he was just paying himself half the dividends.  I tried looking for the post in which he was talking about it, but couldn't find it.  There's no "thread search" here either.  :\

Last I heard, he should have owned around 270 shares.  But, if he was just paying himself the BTC directly, and not reinvesting them back into the company, then he should own 0 shares.
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:13:13 PM
 #776

Well lets see here, there are 10,000 issues shares, how many were sold? The rest are what Tawsix owns.

The one in the issuing account cannot vote.
JL421
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 146


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:27:09 PM
 #777

Well lets see here, there are 10,000 issues shares, how many were sold? The rest are what Tawsix owns.

The one in the issuing account cannot vote.
I know this, but who said he didn't transfer them into another personal account, one that had voting privileges, and that would collect dividends. Again how many shares were actually sold?
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:36:19 PM
 #778

Well lets see here, there are 10,000 issues shares, how many were sold? The rest are what Tawsix owns.

The one in the issuing account cannot vote.
I know this, but who said he didn't transfer them into another personal account, one that had voting privileges, and that would collect dividends. Again how many shares were actually sold?

All that we have to go with is this.

SkepsiDyne Integrated Node is a mining company that is publicly listed on GLBSE.com under the ticker SIN.

As of July 11, we've sold 2,029 shares, and sold the BTC raised for over $15,000.
JL421
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 146


View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:39:59 PM
 #779

So we can assume tawsix controls ~8,000 with which he can do whatever with...
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
November 17, 2011, 06:42:31 PM
 #780

So we can assume tawsix controls ~8,000 with which he can do whatever with...

If he votes with those ~8k shares, then we know that he doesn't give a fuck what we think and that we need to take him to court.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 »
  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!