|
|
Vod
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 3166
Licking my boob since 1970
|
 |
July 10, 2012, 09:54:23 PM |
|
Thank you. I wasn't aware of the timeline. |
|
|
|
|
phantomcircuit
|
|
July 10, 2012, 09:57:59 PM |
|
Your analysis is not only wrong but straight up defamation. Bitcoin Consultancy LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company. Intersango LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company. Bitcoinica LP is a New Zealand Limited Partnership. Core Credit LTD is a New Zealand Limited Company and the General Partner of Bitcoinica LP. Core Credit LTD was renamed to Bitcoinica Consultancy LTD significantly after the events occurred. I personally have absolute no legal obligation to assist in any of this. 100% of my time and effort is donation. As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral. |
|
|
|
|
mrbrown
VIP
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:20:36 PM |
|
This is crazy... What is intersangos motivation for dealing with this anyway? I wish we knew their motivation. If we did we might understand this craziness. They should know better.
As I have made painfully clear before Intersango IS NOT INVOLVED IN BITCOINICA IN ANYWAY. Anybody saying Intersango LTD is a partner in Bitcoinica LP IS LYING. My personal motivation here is to help people get back most of their funds, really the only chance you all have of getting your funds back is me. So how about some fucking respect. I could have easily passed this all off onto zhou and I'm sure he would have paid only the larger claims before running out of funds. Does that sound fair? Can you tell me who send me those mails than from bitcoinica.reimburse@gmail.com? sender Ryan bitcoinica.. |
|
|
|
|
|
ninjarobot
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:22:14 PM
Last edit: July 10, 2012, 10:33:09 PM by ninjarobot |
|
Your analysis is not only wrong but straight up defamation.
Why would I maliciously misrepresent your words or actions? I have nothing to gain by this. I linked to references that are either legal documents or written by members of Bitcoinica LP. Bitcoin Consultancy LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company.
I did not claim this. I claim the members behind both companies are the same. Based on Tihans quote: "The members of Bitcoin Consultancy operated Bitcoinica via a separate New Zealand Ltd company formed for this purpose." Intersango LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company.
I did not mention Intersango LTD at all. Bitcoinica LP is a New Zealand Limited Partnership.
I agree, and did not claim otherwise Core Credit LTD is a New Zealand Limited Company and the General Partner of Bitcoinica LP.
Ah this is new info. On 2012/06/07 Amir claimed that Core Credit Limited is Tihan's Parent company (the Limited Partner). See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=84042.msg946751#msg946751 Core Credit LTD was renamed to Bitcoinica Consultancy LTD significantly after the events occurred.
Yes it happened on 2012/05/30 and it was never explained why this happened despite me asking repeatedly. Nevertheless the legal incorporation date for Bitcoinica Consultancy is 2012/01/30 according to the NZ documentation. I personally have absolute no legal obligation to assist in any of this. 100% of my time and effort is donation.
I didn't say you were individually liable. As far as I understand the General Partner is liable. The General Partner is Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd. You are a member of Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd. (Unless this changed on May 30) Please correct me if I am wrong. As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral.
It seems it is you doing the defamation here. Oh and Patrick - Respect is earned. In the same way I earned the 30.000+ USD worth of funds that you are holding against my consent for the last 2 months. I realize I am probably putting my claim at risk by pissing off 'the only person' who can help me get 'most' of my funds back but so be it. |
|
|
|
|
|
teek
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:26:54 PM |
|
This is crazy... What is intersangos motivation for dealing with this anyway? I wish we knew their motivation. If we did we might understand this craziness. They should know better.
As I have made painfully clear before Intersango IS NOT INVOLVED IN BITCOINICA IN ANYWAY. Anybody saying Intersango LTD is a partner in Bitcoinica LP IS LYING. My personal motivation here is to help people get back most of their funds, really the only chance you all have of getting your funds back is me. So how about some fucking respect. I could have easily passed this all off onto zhou and I'm sure he would have paid only the larger claims before running out of funds. Does that sound fair?
Your analysis is not only wrong but straight up defamation.
Bitcoin Consultancy LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company.
Intersango LTD is a UK Limited company which is neither owned nor owns any other company.
Bitcoinica LP is a New Zealand Limited Partnership.
Core Credit LTD is a New Zealand Limited Company and the General Partner of Bitcoinica LP.
Core Credit LTD was renamed to Bitcoinica Consultancy LTD significantly after the events occurred.
I personally have absolute no legal obligation to assist in any of this. 100% of my time and effort is donation.
As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral.
Hey seriously, this is out of control, fucking respect for what exactly? I don't speak for everyone and I am sure some people have been very difficult to deal with on this, but I have been EXTREMELY polite and patient dealing with you guys, provided information to you / your team / whoever you are to aid in you in piecing together the puzzle, verified my password (which appeared to be successful), have been completely and totally truthful in all information provided to the best of my recollection. What have I got ? ZERO - and losses adding up EVERY SINGLE DAY. My account is worth more than double today than it was on the day you got amateur hour owned. I understand you may not be responsible, but you are speaking as a representative of Bitcoinica / Bitcoinica Consultancy / United Alpaca Brothership / whoever the fuck has our interest free loans right now, and your personal reputation is not what is up for debate here. As representatives of Bitcoinica, you guys all suck, and how you ask for respect at this point is completely fucked because you have blown each chance you have had to command some. It's sad to say, but at this point in time, if you are still this fucking frazzled how could the data you come up with have ANY chance of being even close to accurate? The unfortunate part is, the ones who scream the loudest get the most attention, and I have been fairly quiet throughout this whole ordeal. Btw. Respect is earned. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinBull
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1001
rippleFanatic
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:29:18 PM |
|
How about you give some respect to Zhou ?
Why? He is the one who took on a large project he didn't know how to do, and lost everyone's records. The entire reason you are all in this mess is because he couldn't be bothered to do a braindead backup. Agreed. I'm glad zhou is out of the picture. "Bitcoinica Consultancy" and "Bitcoin Consultancy" and "Intersango" may all be separate legal entities, but obviously all three are the same three people: patrick, amir, and donald. They may not be legally obligated to handle returning the funds, but I feel they owe it to us given their unauthorized e-mail access screw-up. They are apparently returning the funds in good faith. I'm still waiting to get a reply confirming that my claim was accurate. I provided extra information as requested about a week ago (to bitcoinica.reimburse@gmail.com, and I also agree that the change in email address was a little eyebrow-raising). My account activity was minimal and extremely simple: one deposit, no withdrawals, one active position held for weeks unchanged. ~35% of claimants are marked accurate
~86% of total funds are marked accurate
~25% of total funds have been repaid
No people aren't getting emails when their account status changes. I want to get whether a claim is marked accurate or not added to the claim ticket.
I'm looking forward to an update to the above status. As someone also in the dark on the status of my claim, I share some of the frustration. But I'm glad to see the reports from people receiving their funds. |
College of Bucking Bulls Knowledge
|
|
|
|
mobodick
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:30:34 PM |
|
The claims process (both policies and procedures) are very reasonable.
Dude, if you think that communicating through an obscure thread on a forum about peoples lost monies is reasonable then you should have your brain checked for severe damage. Seriously. Worst communication practices ever. There is nothing reasonable about this process whatsoever. There is no confirmation of deposition of claim, for one. You say claim period is closed, but i don't even know you received or accepted my claim because you didnt care to confirm it. Careless practices. Now stop making it look nicer than it realy is and don't patronize people. And please take a course in communication asap, you clearly need it. If you didn't get a confirmation email then you either did not open a claim successfully or your email provider classified it as spam. Almost everybody has received additional emails requesting payment instructions as well. Aah, ok,. so apparently my several attempts to issue a claim all have failed... |
|
|
|
|
|
teek
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:30:55 PM |
|
As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral.
From the sounds of it Zhou was the only one that had any actual day to day ops knowledge of the system. This was probably the best plan given that right now you are basically trying to put together a puzzle with a million pieces and you don't even have the box to refer too for what the fucking thing is supposed to look like. 17 year old asian kids remember everything. |
|
|
|
|
|
phantomcircuit
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:37:44 PM |
|
As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral.
From the sounds of it Zhou was the only one that had any actual day to day ops knowledge of the system. This was probably the best plan given that right now you are basically trying to put together a puzzle with a million pieces and you don't even have the box to refer too for what the fucking thing is supposed to look like. 17 year old asian kids remember everything. His plan was to pay the most vocal people 100% of their claimed amount. Those funds would come directly out of other users pockets. There are x assets and y liabilities. x < y If people are paid 100% of their claims, necessarily those funds are coming out of other users pockets. Not only is this strategy immoral, but it is arguably illegal. Of course the intention there is to save face and to give back funds to people most likely to litigate. I will have no part in anything I believe to be immoral. |
|
|
|
|
|
ThePok
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:46:50 PM |
|
Phantomcircuit let me thank you for you work! Dont get to angry about all this people without patience! Ill be a happy user of Btcoinica again  |
|
|
|
|
|
ninjarobot
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:48:51 PM |
|
His plan was to pay the most vocal people 100% of their claimed amount.
That is not at all what Zhou was suggesting. Here is his plan: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81045.msg921368#msg921368--- Disclaimer: Pure suggestion. NOT OFFICIAL ---
- Your bitcointalk.org profile or Bitcoin-OTC rating shows you as reputable and trustworthy. (50 Points)
- You can supply at least one transactional email you have received which perfectly matches our outgoing transactional email records. (30 Points)
- You can provide passport scans and you have provided to Bitcoinica (even if it's pending verification). (40 Points)
- The order of magnitude of your reported balance is consistent with our outdated accounting records. (30 Points)
- You can recall the balances exactly or very precisely. (20 Points)
- You have reported a losing position, with precise details. (20 Points)
- You have contacted Bitcoinica Support at least once since September 2011. (10 Points)
- Your email can be searched online and matches your identity. (10 Points)
- You can provide proof of Bitcoin address ownership (signature), Mt. Gox code you have used/obtained or accurate details of large transaction records (>2500 BTC) that match our hedging activity. (10 Points each kind of evidence)
- Another reputable member supports your claim. (10 Points)
- You have used wire transfer, BitInstant or AurumXchange to deposit/withdraw funds and they can verify the records. (10 Points)
- You have submitted the claim within the first 24 hours since the announcement. (10 Points)
If there are no transactional emails or support emails ever sent to the claimed address, 0 Points for now.
If you get >= 100 Points, you should be refunded immediately.
If you get >= 50 Points, you can expect partial refunds first. The percentage of partial payments will be calculated using the formula (let P be the points you get):
Partial payment in % = (P/10)^2
e.g. If you get 90 Points, you receive 81% of the claimed amount first. If you get 50 Points, you receive 25% of the claimed amount first.
The rest of the claimed amount will be honored after every request has been processed. Then we can use cross reference to match the remainder records, and hopefully a copy of database can be obtained or leaked. If needed, we can also use external moderation to decide asset ownership.
--- Disclaimer: Pure suggestion. NOT OFFICIAL --- Now I agree that this was not a good plan, and I am happy with the strategy you guys chose to go with a more fact based approach. So no criticism there. |
|
|
|
|
|
teek
|
|
July 10, 2012, 10:51:27 PM |
|
As for Zhou's "plan" that is precisely what he said he intended to do, a strategy I find to be immensely immoral.
From the sounds of it Zhou was the only one that had any actual day to day ops knowledge of the system. This was probably the best plan given that right now you are basically trying to put together a puzzle with a million pieces and you don't even have the box to refer too for what the fucking thing is supposed to look like. 17 year old asian kids remember everything. His plan was to pay the most vocal people 100% of their claimed amount. Those funds would come directly out of other users pockets. There are x assets and y liabilities. x < y If people are paid 100% of their claims, necessarily those funds are coming out of other users pockets. Not only is this strategy immoral, but it is arguably illegal. Of course the intention there is to save face and to give back funds to people most likely to litigate. I will have no part in anything I believe to be immoral. A little from column A, a little from column B, take what Zhou knows / feels and combine it with your strategy and come up with something that's most right. You guys no matter how hard you try or how much you dig, are NEVER going to come up with the info a DB snapshot would have gave you. You're never going to get actually right, so how the hell can you take the moral high ground here when the bulk of your users are suffering losses and are at the whim of your potentially flawed theories? If you have NO DATABASE there are NO RIGHT ANSWERS HERE. A pile of claims and a pile of money, you can basically make the data say whatever you want. The only conclusive evidence is tx's from within a day or two before the hack, everything else is bullshit pretty much. edit: and even the txid's are only conclusive that the funds were deposited / withdrawn, says nothing of what actually happened to them, with the leverage they could have been tripled or lost completely in a very short period of time... |
|
|
|
|
Transisto
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1731
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 10, 2012, 11:00:04 PM
Last edit: July 11, 2012, 01:37:26 AM by Transisto |
|
Thanks ninja, this was the post I was to come up with. Since you haven't given any details of your payout strategy, Zhou's one seems better. One thing is for sure, You are not refunding the most vocal nor the people with the highest balance first. Although selfish and unethical it would make sense for your reputation to do so. It would also make sense to pay-out the highest balance first if it mean the same amount of work. You seems to suggest it would be impossible to refund 100% of claims (if accurate), does that mean Tihan did not cover the lost BTC ? I'm surprised you claim to be doing this benevolently, Want it or not you have the reputation of at least 4-5 people in your hands and I'm sure people would happily give you a % of their fund to get their claim processed faster. |
|
|
|
|
|
superfastkyle
|
|
July 11, 2012, 02:35:57 AM |
|
I really don't understand how the actions taken by Bitcoinica are accepted by anyone in the community. They don't take any responsibility for the hack, even though it was trivial for the hacker to gain access due to their extremely poor security procedures. Now they continue to use unsecure methods of communication to discuss payouts. Why are we letting them get away with this? The name calling? the threats to stop returning money? saying no one owned the company and is responsible?
At the very least we should be removing all links to Intersango, boycotting them and labeling their usernames scammers on the forums. The same people are responsible and will use the same moral code they are right now if anything goes south with Intersango. They continue to make money while we sit without our funds for months. I have offered to donate for legal fees against bitcoinica, too bad no one seems to be willing to take legal action, I have only lost a couple hundred so not worth it by myself. Right now they are getting away with a half million dollars and no one is stopping them. If we let this happen their will be even more fraud even more "hacks"
|
|
|
|
|
disclaimer201
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 11, 2012, 03:03:08 AM |
|
I really don't understand how the actions taken by Bitcoinica are accepted by anyone in the community. They don't take any responsibility for the hack, even though it was trivial for the hacker to gain access due to their extremely poor security procedures. Now they continue to use unsecure methods of communication to discuss payouts. Why are we letting them get away with this? The name calling? the threats to stop returning money? saying no one owned the company and is responsible?
At the very least we should be removing all links to Intersango, boycotting them and labeling their usernames scammers on the forums. The same people are responsible and will use the same moral code they are right now if anything goes south with Intersango. They continue to make money while we sit without our funds for months. I have offered to donate for legal fees against bitcoinica, too bad no one seems to be willing to take legal action, I have only lost a couple hundred so not worth it by myself. Right now they are getting away with a half million dollars and no one is stopping them. If we let this happen their will be even more fraud even more "hacks"
Hope dies last. I get the impression they are really annoyed by having made this business decision. It's all about identification with a project. Whose idea was it to take over Bitcoinica? Probably, the three saw many security bugs from the very beginning and thought "if it runs like this, let it run -little by little we can improve it", and they didn't give much of a shit. They don't feel it is their fault, didn't identify with Bitcoinica since it was not their baby, and now they feel punished to have to clean up the mess. Sorry to tell you, but you are not the victims in this story, your customers are. If at all then morally, maybe. Legally, no. The lack of professionalism and the way customers are only liabilities here that have to be dealt with is sickening. It is exactly the messed-up service mentality still found often in Europe. The customer needs to be happy to receive any attention, and can be glad if he's sold something and serviced. In a market society, all of you would have lost your jobs, and the company would have been sued and you made personally liable for your actions or non-actions. The whole idea of a LTD in the UK is questionable because you only need to deposit 1 British Pound in case the company goes bankrupt. This means, in case of an insolvency nobody gets any money back and you are safe. So, I wonder who would trust an LTD as a serious company ever? |
|
|
|
|
Vod
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 3166
Licking my boob since 1970
|
|
July 11, 2012, 03:18:15 AM |
|
They don't feel it is their fault, didn't identify with Bitcoinica since it was not their baby, and now they feel punished to have to clean up the mess.
Don't believe this for a moment. Every day that passes bitcoins go up in value, and more people abandon their hopes of seeing their coins again. They are going to walk away doing quite nicely I think. I wish I could have their job! |
|
|
|
Phinnaeus Gage
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1570
Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending
|
|
July 11, 2012, 06:32:14 AM |
|
(other than the friends of Intersango team who got back 100% so far) I'm just curious as to how much truth there is to that statement. For all concerns concerned, I dearly hope it's false. ~Bruno~ |
|
|
|
|
|
Vladimir
|
|
July 11, 2012, 09:40:40 AM |
|
for what it worth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veilhttp://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/corporate.htmhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080212143458AARBFa0from answers: Okay - here's where "piercing the corporate veil" comes in. Sometimes, when investors are also officers who run the company, they run it really really badly. Stupidly. Irresponsibly. Maybe even illegally. When that happens, the law says that the corporate form shouldn't protect those particular investor-officers.
Let's say you and I are investors in a company, each in for 20%. But let's say that I am also the CEO, and you are just someone who owns 20% but doesn't actually run the business. You are kept apprised of what's going on periodically, but you don't make the decisions.
Now, let's say I take some of the corporation's money to Vegas and lose it, and the corp can't pay its electric bill. Now, under the general rule I discussed above, since you and I are 20% investors then we are each liable for 20% of the electric bill. But that isn't fair, is it? It isn't fair that you should be on the hook for 20% of that electric bill when the bill wasn't paid because I did something unlawful.
Since I personally did this bad thing, the law makes an exception to the general rule. It says that I personally should be liable to the electric company. It says that the electric company should be able to "lift" or "pierce the corporate veil" that would otherwise protect me as an investor, and reach out and get me, personally, to pay for the entire electric bill.
So that's what piercing the corporate veil is: it's an exception that allows for investor's to be held entirely responsible (the old-fashioned way they used to) for debts of the corporation. But it usually only applies when the investor has done something bad in running the company that he should not have done. Usually something illegal or unlawful.
|
-
|
|
|
zhoutong
VIP
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 490
Merit: 502
|
|
July 11, 2012, 09:44:45 AM
Last edit: July 11, 2012, 05:58:05 PM by zhoutong |
|
Dear Bitcoinica team,
Please stop using my name "Ryan" for any outbound emails. It's my de facto Christian name.
Also, stop mentioning my "plan". I have received no contact from you for almost two month and it's simply wrong for you to judge my involvement in Bitcoinica either morally or legally.
I'll resign immediately when 50% of funds have been paid back, or upon receiving your instruction, whichever is earlier.
I reserve the right to protect my reputation.
EDIT: Amir has clarified that the first name is a random one due to Gmail's naming policy. He didn't intend to mean me personally. He has changed it to "Jason Bitcoinica".
|
|
|
|
|
