Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 02:28:02 PM *
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 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 [75] 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [Payout Updates] Bitcoinica site is taken offline for security investigation  (Read 145690 times)
Herodes
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
July 31, 2012, 01:30:34 AM
 #1481

@Bitcoinica Consultancy - How will the recent developments (e.g. stolen funds returned to Patrick Murck) affect the customer reimbursement process?

Muchly like Intersango - they now only accept initial deposits of 100GBP from new customers, turning their exchange into an outright ponzi.

I rather think it's due to laziness. Man in themiddle attack has aparently occured with Intersango and prompted the Metro investigation. They reckon 5 days to hold the funds will be enough, so that any victims of 'Man in the middle attacks' will then have asked their bank for a refund, which Intersango then readily can do. As for the 100 GBP limit, I don't know. This cuts off all the small guys... But aparently Intersango can't be bothered with caring for the small guys..

There could've been other better ways to prevent these kinds of fraus. I leave that as an exercise to 'the security experts'.


I'm sure there is a <technical reason> for this little inconvenience: extremely low liquidity due to loss of trust following minor tiny bitcoinica hacks/heists, unprofessionalism, lack of accountability, but most of all, narcissistic personality disorders.
Hit the nail on the head.

And, the Intersango boys are organizing the Bitcoin conference in London, we can't give them a scammer tag! This shitstory has done more than just hurt a couple thousand bitcoin members financially. It may as well tear apart the entire bitcoin community. Enjoy your conference close to the banksters in one of the most policed towns on the planet.

I am not going to London for this conference, exactly for this reason, otherwise I would've gone.

Perhaps somebody should call the Sun ? It could be a juicy real life soap opera story!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
August 01, 2012, 03:24:35 AM
 #1482

Obviously the London conference is now nothing more than a gathering of the thieves, and nothing that any self-respecting bitcoin user, developer or adopter would ever want to soil themselves with.

Digging into their own pockets and paying people back in full as they proudly proclaimed they would do when they seized control from the little gangster Zhou would be a nice start to restoring their credibility, that is obviously not going to happen.

I will be the first to proclaim a boycott of any service or product developed, sold or endorsed by any of these users or the myriad of companies that they hide behind.

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
naima53
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616



View Profile
August 01, 2012, 07:11:45 PM
 #1483

Bitсoin Сosnultancy, please, if you still plan to refund. Ask for all applicants to fill in the form of claims again. Then, compare the old with the new form for inconsistencies. Thus, many will be excluded fake claims. If the claimant real - he knows how much he owed​​, and how many have remembered the last time. Many scammers have made several claims, and may not be able to enter the data correctly. You can significantly reduce the amount of payments using this method.

Donate me) 16f6iWHHkVEnDReeBQPT9GwCNwUfPTXrp2
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 01, 2012, 11:51:41 PM
 #1484

Bitсoin Сosnultancy, please, if you still plan to refund. Ask for all applicants to fill in the form of claims again. Then, compare the old with the new form for inconsistencies. Thus, many will be excluded fake claims. If the claimant real - he knows how much he owed​​, and how many have remembered the last time. Many scammers have made several claims, and may not be able to enter the data correctly. You can significantly reduce the amount of payments using this method.

Bitcoin Consultancy doesn't plan to refund. And now they will not be able to anyhow: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97272

Phinnaeus Gage
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 03:56:31 AM
 #1485

Bitсoin Сosnultancy, please, if you still plan to refund. Ask for all applicants to fill in the form of claims again. Then, compare the old with the new form for inconsistencies. Thus, many will be excluded fake claims. If the claimant real - he knows how much he owed​​, and how many have remembered the last time. Many scammers have made several claims, and may not be able to enter the data correctly. You can significantly reduce the amount of payments using this method.

Bitcoin Consultancy doesn't plan to refund. And now they will not be able to anyhow: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97272

I rode the short bus to school, therefore please forgive me for asking the following question if it has already been address: How are they not considered scammers? Whoever answers this, please do so slowly so that I can take notes in case there's a pop-quiz tomorrow.

~Bruno~ (front row, on the teacher's left, near the window, just in case)
Herodes
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 10:56:11 AM
 #1486

I rode the short bus to school, therefore please forgive me for asking the following question if it has already been address: How are they not considered scammers? Whoever answers this, please do so slowly so that I can take notes in case there's a pop-quiz tomorrow.

~Bruno~ (front row, on the teacher's left, near the window, just in case)

I like many of your posts, fellow bitcoiner Bruno. The question you ask there is an interesting question. People are labeled scammers on this forum over petty sums. However when you are involved in a clusterfuck that sees millions vanish, then there's no punishment.

I've followed all the Bitcoinica threads with big interest, unfortunately I've come to the conclusion that all the BC guys are immature men who doesn't take any responsibility. If I was responsible for running Bitcoinica, I would never have announced any takeover before I'd personally (or someone I trust 100%) checked that all assets were properly protected, codebase was sound, and there was no lose ends.

Seeing how one basic security guideline after the other have been ignored/failed at throughout this clusterfuck, and how Intersango support is run, the only conclusion I have left is that these guys simply don't care. We also see now that when the hack happened, Genjix was at Hackathon in Berling, although he should've flipped backwards and shouldn't have spent his weekend coding when so much clusterfuck is happening. He was also recently in Brazil. Brazil is not cheap, and yet he goes on this forum complaining he has a crappy computer, and that he's losing personal funds throughout this orderal. And Donald is now going for a month to Portugal, and apparently all three of them was recently for a trip, to where, Defcon ?

So obv. the priotization is not where we'd expect it to be, and thus they've lost absolutely all credibility. If they honestly tried to sort out this clusterfuck, then at least there could be something left or their reputation. As it is now, this is a hot clusterfuck potato, that nobody wants to hold. Zou Thong is also some character, and not easy to say which role he does have, but it's hard to believe he's innocent. Somebody is pulling the strings in this scam, and we can't exactly be sure about who is profiting here. It could be just one individual, or a few.

We know memorydealers tried to contact the BC guys directly to have the funds paid back, as it was verifyable. As memorydealers have been doing a lot for bitcoin, I think he should've been paid back. Losing 15K BTC, is not something to take lightly.

The astounding silence in this matter is frightening. Donald has said nothing on this forum. Patrick refuses to say anything, he just 'walked away', and Genjix, well if I ever meet him I will try to blow hard on his face to see if he falls over.

But something is gotta give in this clusterfuck. What goes around, comes around.
LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 01:40:39 PM
 #1487

Bruno-

Your question is spot on... they are considered scammers by this observer. Every single one of these Bitcoin Consultancy/Bitcoinica players carries a full-on scammer tag in my book, they may never get one officially on this forum because they have built up a lot of love with certain power brokers, but scammers they are and scammers they shall be reviled as.

You cannot buy a clean reputation by funding magazines or hosting events, or making donations. A reputation is based on the entire body of work- and for these bastards the enduring legacy is the loss of tens of thousands of bitcoins to criminal intent, gross incompetence and outright dishonesty. Doing it with clear malice of forethought and premeditation makes them scammers.

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
Vladimir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


-


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 05:19:05 PM
 #1488

You cannot buy a clean reputation by funding magazines...

True. However, since some chose to believe that Zhou Tong has somehow funded Bitcoin Magazine, I would like to make the following statement.

1. Bittalk Media Ltd was formed on 23/12/2011. see http://business.data.gov.uk/id/company/07891749

2. Whatever donations Zhou Tong may have given to bittalk.tv way before December 2011, Bittalk Media Ltd and Bitcoin Magazine have none of it. We do not have any equipment reportedly bought using those funds on our books either.

3. Zhou Tong is neither shareholder nor director nor creditor nor donator of Bittalk Media Ltd. He is also not an advertiser in Bitcoin Magazine.

4. I can see every single transaction in history of the company and not a single penny is received from Zhou Tong or Bitcoinica GP. (This excludes single copy or subscription purchases, if any).

5. DCAO is not Bittalk Media Ltd.

6. To the best of my knowledge Bittalk Media Ltd. has approximately 1380$ "misappropriated" by Bitcoinica GP. These money were in an account controlled by me personally and earmarked to be used for payment of shipping fees for Bitcoin Magazine.

7. Matthew N. Wright, while Editor in Chief of Bitcoin Magazine, and likely also the heart and soul of it, when posting on this forum is expressing his own opinions which are not necessarily the same as opinions of Bitcoin Magazine or its publisher. Matthew does not own a controlling stake in the company. Bitcoin Magazine is a product of collaboration of fairly large team.

I hope this clears up the matter of alleged donations made by Zhou Tong or Bitcoinica to Bitcoin Magazine.

Vladimir Marchenko
Executive Editor, Bitcoin Magazine,
Managing Director, Bittalk Media Ltd.

-
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
August 02, 2012, 05:40:03 PM
 #1489

7. Matthew N. Write, while Editor in Chief of Bitcoin Magazine, and likely also the heart and soul of it, when posting on this forum is expressing his own opinions which are not necessarily the same as opinions of Bitcoin Magazine or its publisher. Matthew does not own a controlling stake in the company. Bitcoin Magazine is a product of collaboration of fairly large team.

You could greatly increase the reputation of your magazine by removing Matthew from his position.  Myself, like many others, won't be going near your publication while he is around.

I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to prayers.
If you want your prayers answered, you must donate to 1CDyx8AUTiYXS1ThcBU3vy4SJWQq6pdFMH
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


1ngldh


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 06:57:48 PM
 #1490

You could greatly increase the reputation of your magazine by removing Matthew from his position.  Myself, like many others, won't be going near your publication while he is around.
You can speak for yourself, and others can speak for themselves. Keep your generalizations to yourself.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 08:39:17 PM
 #1491

Vladimir-

Thank you for the clarity on Bitcoin Magazines relationships both with Zhou Tong and with others in this community. I am pleased to note that Zhou Tong does not hold any position of authority in your organization, as has been rumored by some, and is limited only to some donations before the Magazine really went live, to some in your organization. Matthew has often spoken as if he is the leader of your group, and my thoughts were that he might be bringing others along on his crusade who might not want to be associated with the guilty in this matter.

And to be frank- I don't have a problem with Matthew as a contributor, leader or lightening rod in this community, rather I respect him for his views, and encourage most all of them, as I have found him to be a champion of what is good and right about bitcoin far more than this present issue. I feel, and this is a personal observation only, that he has a very narrow focus due to his relationship with the person represented as Zhou Tong, and is trying to be a supportive friend and mentor. Great big props for the initiative, but the Loupish judge is giving a poor score on technical execution. Finding fault with one insignificant point of public disclosure is finding the mote in a gnat's eye, when there is a huge boulder crushing the life out of the elephant next door. ArumX has disclosed, has had their info publicly outed, and it is available. Trying to argue a minute point of information privacy, which would not apply in this case, is not a solution. Let's all work together to bring this ugly chapter to a close, not find reason for internecine squabbling between ourselves. This is a near fatal blow to bitcoin, and can do nothing positive for the future of our much beloved crypto-currency, the only thing any of us should be concerned with now is establishing who is guilty, bringing them to justice, be it traditional, vigilante or Sharia, getting the approx. half million dollars in wealth back to the owners, and most importantly learning out lessons from this catastrophe.

Those lessons should be obvious, but we all want to believe in the magic tooth fairy. There is no free lunch. You cannot create more out of less. The house always wins, and if the house is crooked, the player always gets burned in the end. Not everybody is completely honest on the internet, and a lot of very bad people have very compelling stories, and huge technical skill. Be wary if something sounds too good to be true- it is. Nobody is looking to bankrupt themselves to give it all away. Life is full of ulterior motives, many of which have you playing the role of chump, loser and victim. Even if you want to disbelieve when someone is saying the Emperor is running down the street naked, just because it isn't the popular opinion, take a moment in the privacy of your own thoughts to consider that the lunatics who don't see what you are convinced is true, might be right. Skepticism is healthy.

Thus endeth the lesson.

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
Rarity
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 08:47:56 PM
 #1492

You did violate your privacy policy and you are spearheading this witch hunt.  Shooting the messenger doesn't change that.

"Money is like manure: Spread around, it helps things grow. Piled up in one place, it just stinks."
LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 08:52:43 PM
 #1493

Gosh... I thought the only shooting of messengers was your own vitriol towards ML there Rarity? Whose privacy policy was violated? Once a criminal act is in the mix any published rules no longer apply, as one cannot use a contract to support a criminal act, the criminal act abrogates the contract.

Or are you referring to me spearheading a witch hunt? I'm not. I like witches. I don't like thieves, and I will not suffer fools, or those who follow them. Where exactly do you want to dance for this number?

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
Rarity
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 08:56:25 PM
 #1494

Gosh... I thought the only shooting of messengers was your own vitriol towards ML there Rarity? Whose privacy policy was violated? Once a criminal act is in the mix any published rules no longer apply, as one cannot use a contract to support a criminal act, the criminal act abrogates the contract.

Or are you referring to me spearheading a witch hunt? I'm not. I like witches. I don't like thieves, and I will not suffer fools, or those who follow them. Where exactly do you want to dance for this number?

No, quoting ML as admitting to stalking and committing crimes in relation to ZT is not the same as dodging questions of guilt to talk about questions of funding to imply ulterior motives.  The only question is if the accusations of privacy violations are true, and they are.  

"Money is like manure: Spread around, it helps things grow. Piled up in one place, it just stinks."
LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:05:35 PM
 #1495

Gosh... I thought the only shooting of messengers was your own vitriol towards ML there Rarity? Whose privacy policy was violated? Once a criminal act is in the mix any published rules no longer apply, as one cannot use a contract to support a criminal act, the criminal act abrogates the contract.

Or are you referring to me spearheading a witch hunt? I'm not. I like witches. I don't like thieves, and I will not suffer fools, or those who follow them. Where exactly do you want to dance for this number?

No, quoting ML as admitting to stalking and committing crimes in relation to ZT is not the same as dodging questions of guilt to talk about questions of funding to imply ulterior motives.  The only question is if the accusations of privacy violations are true, and they are.  

Or not. One cannot use the law to protect unlawful action. Any right to privacy that "Zhou Tong" believed he had disappeared when the hack happened, and his account applied for the transfer of those very same stolen funds, however they magically appeared in his account.

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:06:01 PM
 #1496

Dear Roberto,

I believe character and integrity are shown best in times of the greatest oppression. Your thread labeling Zhou Tong as a thief, discussing an active AML investigation (or if there was no investigation, illegitimately holding the funds in question) was unacceptable by any stretch of the imagination. This is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of any other human being, although most agree with me. If you were a customer of Bitcoin magazine and we found out you -might- be a scammer, we wouldn't break our customer privacy agreement to release data about you on a public forum for the benefit of---who?


The article at http://bitcoinmagazine.net/the-july-13-bitcoinica-investigation-and-sound-justice/ was not written by me and I mostly approve -print- articles as internet based articles can be published while I sleep and approved by other directors instead. This is something that is not known to the public so I am taking the time to mention it here.

Since you have expressed an issue with the article's contents, the best thing to do would be like everyone else and contact the article's author, which in this case is Vitalik Buterin. I am sure he would be happy to explain his viewpoints on his personal article with you. As for reflecting poorly on your business, with all due respect, the action of posting the thread against your privacy agreement and AML investigation (which I understand is a criminal offense) is probably the culprit behind the reasoning of that article, which although I did not in fact approve myself, I completely agree with. Vitalik is a very good writer.

Bitcoin Magazine is a magazine with integrity and we offer balanced articles to the public, bitcoiners and non-bitcoiners alike. Vitalik Buterin's opinions in his articles do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the rest of the Bitcoin Magazine. As the Editor in Chief, I will be happy to forward your general bullet point list of supposed inaccuracies to the author, but it would be much simpler to just email him yourself at vitalik@bitcoinmagazine.co.uk. If you however believe that the Bitcoin Magazine is in the business of restricting its writers from sharing their opinions, you are mistaken. That said, if you feel Vitalik has crossed some line, the -quickest- way to contact him is through the email address provided.

I thank you for your support of the Bitcoin Magazine as we also loved to support AurumXChange. We're all in Bitcoin for the same reasons. Progress. As a member of this community I truly and genuinely wish your exchange all the success in the world, however, I sincerely hope no further unlawful and aggressive activities will be seen officially from your exchange and that you will be more careful not to break privacy agreements and share information unlawfully in a public forum.

As mentioned earlier (and 8 months ago on DCAO's website), Zhou Tong, who was thrilled at BitTalk.TV, decided to donate $11,000 USD to the project. Since we were incorporating shortly after that, and BitTalk.TV did in fact "start" the ball rolling for Bitcoin Magazine idea-wise, I figured it didn't hurt any to refer to it as one in the same. I was wrong, and now I see why it is more important to be literal about those kinds of things. BitTalk.TV, which has no business registration and therefor is personally mine, received a donation from Zhou Tong for camera equipment. Ken Armitt also had planned on a donation for a rendering computer. Many others had planned donations as well, as everyone in the DCAO wanted BitTalk.TV to grow into something that replace the extremely boring Bruce Wagner comedy hour. I have never denied or even attempted to be anything but proud of that donation, as I still am. BitTalk Media however, to be exact, has received no donations, but investments, and those investments were not from Zhou Tong. The donation is not related to the magazine, there is no conflict of interest, if Tom Williams was the person you posted the thread about (and anyone who knows my posting history knows this) I would -still- call you out on it any day of the week.

Your issue with titles is a good point, we haven't kept up on updating the website(s) as we have been busy working (I know you know how that is sometimes). I am currently Editor in Chief and pretty much always have been, we just weren't sure on the titles in the beginning because we started very small. We are now working with over 40 employees, part-time, contract, and full, and "Bitcoin Magazine" is not "Matthew's". Vitalik Buterin was planned to replace me as Editor in Chief but a decision was made to wait longer and the website was apparently inconsistent with that decision. I will change the about us page now since it's not incorrect and serves no purpose other than to confuse.

As for your question of what can be interpreted by any reasonable court of law as biased or malicious, I will refer to your original thread in which you may have unlawfully released account information in an active AML investigation (which carries with it a punishment of 10 years of imprisonment) OR held funds for longer than 7 days -without- any actual official investigation, also illegal.

As for accusations, we have not seen any proof in the thread that you have contacted Zhou Tong, we have not seen any official registration information provided by you to Zhou Tong, and we have claims that Zhou Tong has never received anything from you. Since both sides are just hearsay, I feel I am completely justified in asking for more proof and having my own opinion. If I am mistaken in my belief that you have in fact posted a thread with private customer information unlawfully and hindered an AML investigation, I would ask that instead of further ignoring the questions given to you to request us to change the contents of our articles, and instead do due diligence and answer the questions.

Question #1: Is there a criminal investigation/police filing on Zhou Tong?

Question #2: Was there at the time the funds were held? I was told that you waited 12 days before posting the thread and that the other parties involved did not want you to because they -knew- it was unlawful to do so.

Question #3: Was a criminal report (if ever filed) filed -after- you posted the thread?

Question #4: Can you provide proof that emails were in fact sent to any email address Zhou Tong owns?

Question #5: Can you provide proof that you have given Zhou Tong contact information for your business? (Adam Harding, our customer accounts manager posting an address on this thread does not count in a court of law as you giving him your contact information)

Thank you Roberto!

I hope we can get all of this figured out soon and get on with our lives.


Matthew N. Wright
Editor in Chief and Co-Founder
of BitTalk Media, publishers of
Bitcoin Magazine

Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:19:22 PM
 #1497

I don't have a problem with Matthew as a contributor, leader or lightening rod in this community, rather I respect him for his views, and encourage most all of them, as I have found him to be a champion of what is good and right about bitcoin far more than this present issue. I feel, and this is a personal observation only, that he has a very narrow focus due to his relationship with the person represented as Zhou Tong, and is trying to be a supportive friend and mentor. Great big props for the initiative, but the Loupish judge is giving a poor score on technical execution.

I appreciate this honesty and I will be more careful in the future in my presentation of my points regarding sensitive issues of this nature (I admit I have trolled with glee in this witchhunt thread where it seems everyone -but- Zhou should be burned at the stake for going senile), but there is a sense of morals here that honestly I can't shake. Whether it were Zhou or anyone else, all I keep thinking of is "BitMole" being a "scammer" because of what someone says. It can happen to anyone, and truth should be sought out, not hearsay and bullying. This community has been reduced to a bunch of children crying to burn the witch, some attempting on physical violence and total invasions of privacy, just because a picture was painting in a certain light. If the thread was created by a normal member asking questions, I would have had a much different attitude I assure you, but for the authorities in question to come and tell everyone to throw rocks, it kind of makes you lose faith in the system entirely. I think Roberto made a grave and potentially highly illegal mistake in doing what he did, and I -still- yet to see any inconclusive evidence that Zhou Tong has committed a crime, and in contrast he has continued to stick around and provide information.

Zhou Tong is not fake, there is an equal chance his identity was stolen (he does get around a lot and do a lot of things normal users don't do, as does any developer in Bitcoin who also owns a financial business, or anyone who is 17 for that matter), and the emotions surrounding the witch hunt I feel are all due to the fact that the Intersango group have taken a vacation.

It is true that he could be lying and a mastermind, but it's also true that I could be Atlas, that MtGox could be reading everyone's PMs here every single day, and that Pirate controls the price of bitcoin and is not a ponzi at all. Are we going to speculate wildly with people's lives and safety or are we going to demand evidence until we make up our minds? Why does Zhou Tong have to provide all the evidence? Where is the evidence from AurumXChange that they even emailed him in the first place? I think until Zhou gets the money back from Chen, it should be an "on-hold" situation.

Vladimir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


-


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:30:27 PM
 #1498

Roberto,

 Thank you for your well thought out and reasonable post. I am more than happy to discuss with you privately whatever inaccuracies there might be in the article you quoted and if some specific points were posted incorrectly surely this can be resolved either by publishing your views of this matter or making retraction as appropriate where facts of the matter were perceived incorrectly by article's author.

 I also would like to clear up possible confusion about all those C level titles. As most likely know the company is very small and all those C level titles and functions of team members are rather flexible and the titles should be taken with a grain of salt. For example, I have started as CTO but then had to take over many functions of managing director and operations director as well lately (need to make sure that there are no more shipping delays as it has happened with issue #1). Things do change over time. Likewise, while we hoped initially that Vitalik will act as Editor In Chief, it has not happened for a number of reasons and that function is now with Matthew, however we expect Vitalik to take over Editor in Chief functions again before long. Also it should be noted that functions performed by the team members are different for the company and for the magazine. I am for example listed as CTO for the company and executive editor for the magazine, whatever that means. I find all these loud titles rather superficial considering how small the company is.

Surely we should have paid more attention to keeping about us page up to date. I have now fixed whatever inaccuracies I could find there. As for issue of Zhou's donation to Bittalk Media Ltd. it seems to be just a mistake made by whomever wrote the text for that page long time ago. Perhaps there was some confusion between bittalk.tv website and Bittalk Media Ltd. as a company. Clearly that donation has happened before the company was formed and I became a director of the company as well as a founding member. I have now removed erroneous statement about donation from the "about us" page.

LoupGaroux, Thank you for your posts above as well. I, personally, always enjoyed your posts and agree with you much more often than not. There is one point I would ask you consider however. Given that Zhou is a minor (to the best of my knowledge) perhaps one should be more careful with public criminal allegations. Consider that, for example, in criminal cases in UK names of minors are withheld from public record even for rapist and murderers. I would respectfully suggest that matters of privacy should be managed more delicately specifically when it concerns minors.




-
Inedible
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630


What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:56:43 PM
 #1499

Specifically, the following accusations against our company, as well as our business partner MtGox are untrue and very serious:

"Regardless of who is guilty and who is being framed, however, there is another matter at stake: what happened to due process? By making the details of their investigation public, AurumXChange and MtGox have broken their own privacy agreements and by publicly drawing the conclusion that Zhou Tong is the thief in the same statement they have given up any pretense of being neutral arbiters of justice.".


As a member of this community and as a sponsor of the Bitcoin Magazine (full disclosure, AurumXchange has purchased a two page centerfold on issue #2 of the magazine many months ago), I truly and genuinely wish you guys all the success in the world, however, I sincerely hope these damning inaccuracies can be reviewed by you and retracted if necessary. I believe it is safe to assert at this point that Matthew has indeed taken donations from Zhou Tong for at least one of his personal project (over ten thousand dollars as far as I know), and that while not related to the magazine, can, and in my opinion has, affected his judgement on this whole situation.

I'm not sure I follow here.

First of all, what inaccuracies are there?

You did make a considerable amount of personal information publicly available. It appears to me it was done because the information you had seemed pretty conclusive in light of the information you had. In your position I'd have come to the same conclusion, however, I'd have kept the private information private and left it to the police to decide what charges to bring. As it turns out, there might be a legitimate reason as to why $40K was in ZT's possession and this will come to light at some point.

Secondly, I think you're conflating Matthew's integrity with what was published. The two aren't the same thing. The only other meaning I can make of what you're saying is that the information is biased because he once received a donation from ZT and I can't imagine that's what you mean because as you know, the article wasn't written by him.

Quote from: aurumxchange
I fully understand that this article was not written by Matthew per se, however, it is pretty much to a T what Matthew has been posting on this forum, and that as the editor in chief, he at least approved this article.

So you're either saying that Matthew applied editorial influence over the article (which I'm convinced you're not) or that it's a lucky coincidence the writer and Matthew have the same opinion?

Quote from: aurumxchange
Do you understand how, and why, this article could be interpreted by any reasonable court of law as biased and malicious?

I could believe that there's some malice if the inaccuracy you mentioned was indeed inaccurate but the information provided seems to have no further malicious intent than what you published regarding the whole incident (unless your meaning when you published was that you'd already judged ZT to be guilty). Also, in regards to financial incentives, it would make more sense to say that the limited, one time donation that ZT made would be nothing compared to the future advertising revenue available from aurumxchange.

If this post was useful, interesting or entertaining, then you've misunderstood. 1N6rmaDiPf8ke3mx8217NykAMDZXkX713x
Inedible
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630


What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 10:01:32 PM
 #1500

Whose privacy policy was violated? Once a criminal act is in the mix any published rules no longer apply, as one cannot use a contract to support a criminal act, the criminal act abrogates the contract.

You know, fundamentally I don't disagree with you. What I disagree with is I don't feel we ought to be judge, jury and executioner. I also disagree we've conclusively caught the thief.

If ZT isn't the thief, the real thief goes free whilst a valuable member of the community gets punished for a crime they didn't commit.

That to me isn't justice.

If this post was useful, interesting or entertaining, then you've misunderstood. 1N6rmaDiPf8ke3mx8217NykAMDZXkX713x
Pages: « 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 [75] 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 »
  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!