Bitcoin Forum
October 22, 2018, 03:38:31 PM *
News: Make sure you are not using versions of Bitcoin Core other than 0.17.0 [Torrent], 0.16.3, 0.15.2, or 0.14.3. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 [869] 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 ... 2453 »
  Print  
Author Topic: GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)  (Read 3194216 times)
jh7phone
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 07:20:29 PM
 #17361

Now is the time for ex-moderators with a decent sense of morals, like they say they have, and why they quit, to disclose their NDA to the SEC and actually make up for all the wrong they've done and help propagate. They were paid employees of GAW, as one of them has stated already, and I think they now, more than ever, need to save the current victims and future unknowing victims their money, time, and emotional well being. You can absolve yourself of the negative karma/sin/whatever you want to call it by blowing the whistle on this and you will gladly be welcome as a hero. Just food for thought.

Hi Waffle,

I have no issues with the NDA actually being reviewed - it was actually from a Dog Sanctuary originally I think - a copy is here https://www.geekforaweek.co.uk/GAW/NDA.doc for anyone to happily review (I am not going to post the signed one as it contains Personally Identifying Information to myself, and I am sure you understand not to put all your details on the internet Wink

Yes we were paid by GAW, however, I would stretch it to say employed, acting under orders, yes, and if anyone asks, it was $150 per week that Moderators were paid - possibly still are paid - I dont know (Josh actually said we were paid on Hashtalk at one point, someone asked him the amount, he never answered).

I have no issues releasing the documentation, chat logs from Slack and Google Hangouts (I wrote a screen scraper so I could catch up on conversations as I was asleep when all the decisions were made) as well as additional spreadsheets and emails I have to the appropriate authorities should they request it.

My original reasons for leaving were as stated - I could no longer believe in what I was seeing, unfortunately when you are "behind the scenes" you see a completely different aspect to the one you see in front as you can well understand.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

Animo

Careful with .doc files

They are a notepad file, made executable by
the embedding of benign or malicious script using Object Linking and
Embedding (OLE).
..doc files are not pure data files... .doc is the extension used for ms
word documents and are thus OLE2 objects - they are, in effect, their
own file system (and have file system troubles like fragmentation) and
can contain interpreted programs called macros... and those macros can
be infectious...

just paste the text here

1540222711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1540222711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1540222711
Reply with quote  #2

1540222711
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1540222711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1540222711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1540222711
Reply with quote  #2

1540222711
Report to moderator
1540222711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1540222711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1540222711
Reply with quote  #2

1540222711
Report to moderator
1540222711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1540222711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1540222711
Reply with quote  #2

1540222711
Report to moderator
10BTCaDay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 07:21:13 PM
 #17362

Now is the time for ex-moderators with a decent sense of morals, like they say they have, and why they quit, to disclose their NDA to the SEC and actually make up for all the wrong they've done and help propagate. They were paid employees of GAW, as one of them has stated already, and I think they now, more than ever, need to save the current victims and future unknowing victims their money, time, and emotional well being. You can absolve yourself of the negative karma/sin/whatever you want to call it by blowing the whistle on this and you will gladly be welcome as a hero. Just food for thought.

Hi Waffle,

I have no issues with the NDA actually being reviewed - it was actually from a Dog Sanctuary originally I think - a copy is here https://www.geekforaweek.co.uk/GAW/NDA.doc for anyone to happily review (I am not going to post the signed one as it contains Personally Identifying Information to myself, and I am sure you understand not to put all your details on the internet Wink

Yes we were paid by GAW, however, I would stretch it to say employed, acting under orders, yes, and if anyone asks, it was $150 per week that Moderators were paid - possibly still are paid - I dont know (Josh actually said we were paid on Hashtalk at one point, someone asked him the amount, he never answered).

I have no issues releasing the documentation, chat logs from Slack and Google Hangouts (I wrote a screen scraper so I could catch up on conversations as I was asleep when all the decisions were made) as well as additional spreadsheets and emails I have to the appropriate authorities should they request it.

My original reasons for leaving were as stated - I could no longer believe in what I was seeing, unfortunately when you are "behind the scenes" you see a completely different aspect to the one you see in front as you can well understand.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

Animo

Do you or do you not have information that could incriminate Josh Garza? If you do.. you should release it to the public, he won't be able to sue you for releasing information if his whole organization is bankrupt.

DAEX ◄► RELIABLE CLEARING ECOSYSTEM ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ANNWHITEPAPERBOUNTY 
10BTCaDay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 07:22:11 PM
 #17363

Now is the time for ex-moderators with a decent sense of morals, like they say they have, and why they quit, to disclose their NDA to the SEC and actually make up for all the wrong they've done and help propagate. They were paid employees of GAW, as one of them has stated already, and I think they now, more than ever, need to save the current victims and future unknowing victims their money, time, and emotional well being. You can absolve yourself of the negative karma/sin/whatever you want to call it by blowing the whistle on this and you will gladly be welcome as a hero. Just food for thought.

Hi Waffle,

I have no issues with the NDA actually being reviewed - it was actually from a Dog Sanctuary originally I think - a copy is here https://www.geekforaweek.co.uk/GAW/NDA.doc for anyone to happily review (I am not going to post the signed one as it contains Personally Identifying Information to myself, and I am sure you understand not to put all your details on the internet Wink

Yes we were paid by GAW, however, I would stretch it to say employed, acting under orders, yes, and if anyone asks, it was $150 per week that Moderators were paid - possibly still are paid - I dont know (Josh actually said we were paid on Hashtalk at one point, someone asked him the amount, he never answered).

I have no issues releasing the documentation, chat logs from Slack and Google Hangouts (I wrote a screen scraper so I could catch up on conversations as I was asleep when all the decisions were made) as well as additional spreadsheets and emails I have to the appropriate authorities should they request it.

My original reasons for leaving were as stated - I could no longer believe in what I was seeing, unfortunately when you are "behind the scenes" you see a completely different aspect to the one you see in front as you can well understand.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

Animo

Careful with .doc files

They are a notepad file, made executable by
the embedding of benign or malicious script using Object Linking and
Embedding (OLE).
..doc files are not pure data files... .doc is the extension used for ms
word documents and are thus OLE2 objects - they are, in effect, their
own file system (and have file system troubles like fragmentation) and
can contain interpreted programs called macros... and those macros can
be infectious...

If you're paranoid open it here: http://www.viewdocsonline.com/

DAEX ◄► RELIABLE CLEARING ECOSYSTEM ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ANNWHITEPAPERBOUNTY 
AnimoEsto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155
Merit: 100


View Profile WWW
January 20, 2015, 07:28:38 PM
 #17364


Careful with .doc files


Good point, I wasnt thinking - still in work mode - here it is on pastebin

http://pastebin.com/j6ZrZ3Gn

████→→       ● DeepOnion                                                                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯ 
████→→       ● Tor integrated, 100% anonymous!                                       Get Your FREE Coins NOW!     
████→→       ● Free Airdrop! (No ICO, No Crowdfund)                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯
Paul Revere
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250


The Scamcoats are coming!


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 07:51:08 PM
 #17365

Found this weird video - appears to be a congregation of crypto scammers performing for their followers:

http://bit.ly/1CxoDFz

Ha! That's hilarious. Didn't recognize Homero at first with that purty black hair!



When I saw the image of Josh with the Jester hat on it stirred some looong dormant brain cells and I instantly thought of the "Safety Dance" Video with the dancing lute playing midget jester(Earworm alert: click this link with Caution!)



Quote
Ss-C-A-M-M-Yy
SCAMMY-dance!
Ah we can SCAM if we want to, we can leave your friends behind
Cause your friends don't SCAM and if they don't SCAM
Well they're no friends of mine
I say, we can go where we want to, A place where they will never find (But I'll hire bodyguards just in case!)
And we can act like we come from out of this world
Leave the real one far behind,
And we can SCAM

We can go when we want to
The night is young and so am I
And we can dress real neat from our hats to our feet
And surprise 'em with the victory cry

Say, we can SCAM if we want to
If we don't, nobody will
And you can act real rude and totally removed
And I can act like an imbecile

All of my posts are simply statements of my own personal opinions based on available information and pondering what might be possible considering human nature, with the goal of finding truth and preventing fraud. Please look at all of the facts and theories and put your thinking cap on to draw your own conclusions. If you feel that I have made a false statement or have been unnecessarily derogatory, I encourage you to please point it out, and if proven correct and/or reasonable I will remedy it. ~ Paul Revere
Mr Felt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 491
Merit: 518



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 07:51:25 PM
 #17366


Careful with .doc files


Good point, I wasnt thinking - still in work mode - here it is on pastebin

http://pastebin.com/j6ZrZ3Gn

To me, there are several angles I'd use to attack this document if I had a client in my state trying to get out of the same - assuming the document were a document governed by the laws of my state. Few examples:

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite.  

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document.  

Not legal advice. I'm not your lawyer.
AnimoEsto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155
Merit: 100


View Profile WWW
January 20, 2015, 08:00:46 PM
 #17367

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite.  

I am in the UK - to me its a moot point

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

Actually, GAW allowed us all to return it via electronic means, with electronic signatures if need be - we never received a copy back

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document.  

Its not even their NDA they copied it from an Animal Sanctuary

████→→       ● DeepOnion                                                                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯ 
████→→       ● Tor integrated, 100% anonymous!                                       Get Your FREE Coins NOW!     
████→→       ● Free Airdrop! (No ICO, No Crowdfund)                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯
Mr Felt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 491
Merit: 518



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:20:06 PM
 #17368

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite.  

I am in the UK - to me its a moot point

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

Actually, GAW allowed us all to return it via electronic means, with electronic signatures if need be - we never received a copy back

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document.  

Its not even their NDA they copied it from an Animal Sanctuary

RE: 2 - doesn't matter if they allowed it to be returned electronically.  There's a provision in that agreement that says the written agreement alone represents the entire agreement between the parties and that any deviation has to be done in writing.  So, possibly nobody signed it given they didn't provide you w/ a signed copy.  Tongue
eightcylinders
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:29:20 PM
 #17369

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite. 

I am in the UK - to me its a moot point

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

Actually, GAW allowed us all to return it via electronic means, with electronic signatures if need be - we never received a copy back

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document. 

Its not even their NDA they copied it from an Animal Sanctuary

A few more thoughts (as with Mr. Felt, I am not your lawyer so take this to your lawyer if you can).  The following is based on U.S. law, but my knowledge of UK law is decent and I don't think there would be much difference:

1) An NDA used to shield fraud or cover other criminal conduct is unenforceable (courts do not enforce contracts that violate public policy; in fact, a contract to conceal a crime is itself a criminal violation: Model Penal Code 242.5 and state statutes cited therein).  I am not saying that your NDA is being used to shield or fraud or criminal violation - you need to figure that part out.  But IF that is the case, the NDA cannot be asserted against you if you only disclose the facts behind the fraud/criminal violation.

2) Reporting to an agency is in most states and countries privileged and less likely to subject you to a lawsuit from GAW

3) Revealing "trade secrets" is more problematic than revealing other CI as trade secrets receive greater protection generally.  A trade secret is CI that derives substantial economic value from being secret and which is protected by gaw as a trade secret.  Most CI would not qualify.

4) If you qualify as an employee under whistleblower statutes in most cases, reporting is allowed notwithstanding NDAs

5) Only information you received from GAW is protected; information from others is not

6) Information ceases to be protected once it becomes public.  If info is already public, you are released from your non-disclosure by the last para on the first page

My BTC Addres: 1PMEJCY6ofqmnAdYbdQqToZ7MNSAz35w7v
=>Buy the world's first hardware wallet.   Safer than paper and easier to use than smartphones.  If you use Bitcoin you need this: Buy Trezor!!
coinits
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1010


011110000110110101110010


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:31:01 PM
 #17370

LOL The Gawtards gave up attacking in here and use others OPs to do so.

Check out this quote:

881 pages of opinions all written by not more than 20 people while GAW's customers can be counted in thousands. A nice hater lounge you have there, full of newbies posting memes all day Cheesy

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=923897.msg10220499#msg10220499
Only 20 people in here writing opinions in contrast to the thousands of customers who just love GAWD.


Jump you fuckers! | The thing about smart motherfuckers is they sound like crazy motherfuckers to dumb motherfuckers. | My sig space for rent for 25 btc per week.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1805



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:41:28 PM
 #17371

LOL The Gawtards gave up attacking in here and use others OPs to do so.

Check out this quote:

881 pages of opinions all written by not more than 20 people while GAW's customers can be counted in thousands. A nice hater lounge you have there, full of newbies posting memes all day Cheesy

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=923897.msg10220499#msg10220499
Only 20 people in here writing opinions in contrast to the thousands of customers who just love GAWD.

Oh, our buddy bitgeek is alive. Well, he was never good at math or stats, so that's fine. Nice to see him sticking with GAW through ups and downs, mostly downs recently. Ask him how much XPY he's hodling and what's the cost basis.

KC6TTR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:47:48 PM
 #17372

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite.  

I am in the UK - to me its a moot point

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

Actually, GAW allowed us all to return it via electronic means, with electronic signatures if need be - we never received a copy back

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document.  

Its not even their NDA they copied it from an Animal Sanctuary
Any copy/paste NDA and/or TOS is not enforceable in matters that are found to be criminal [unlawful] in nature. Digital signatures are another matter with facsimiles still holding more grown over scanned/emailed docs. There are, however, online 3rd party digital signature services now that address this.

Scott-
strangerdanger101
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:48:22 PM
 #17373

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, contracts w/ an indefinite duration are not enforceable. I took a quick read-through of the NDA and it looks like the term is indefinite.  

I am in the UK - to me its a moot point

2. Also, its not effective until both parties sign and deliver the NDA.  Delivery methods, unless defined, often refer to physical delivery of the documents or notice.  This NDA doesn't seem to authorize electronic delivery. I'm guessing both sides did not sign and deliver physical copies of this document - but I'm just speculating and have no way of knowing the truth.

Actually, GAW allowed us all to return it via electronic means, with electronic signatures if need be - we never received a copy back

3. Generally, courts frown on retraints on trade.  There's a movement away from the enforceability of non-compete agreements and NDAs for this reason. That would be another angle I'd explore if I were looking for a way to attack this document.  

Its not even their NDA they copied it from an Animal Sanctuary

RE: 2 - doesn't matter if they allowed it to be returned electronically.  There's a provision in that agreement that says the written agreement alone represents the entire agreement between the parties and that any deviation has to be done in writing.  So, possibly nobody signed it given they didn't provide you w/ a signed copy.  Tongue

No NDA can oblige you to be part of criminal conduct, or prevent you from reporting it.  By the looks of it you can use that NDA as toilet paper.

What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
vancefox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1029
Merit: 1005



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:54:26 PM
 #17374

While it is true that an NDA can not be used to shield criminal activity, it's still up to a judge if disclosing information with an NDA would violate legal privilege.

I strongly suggest anyone looking to ignore a signed NDA, even one from GAW, to seek a legal opinion from a qualified non forum posting individual (read as seek legal advice from a barred lawyer).

With that said, I have no NDA so whatever I find out by reading their absolute crap code I disclose without worrying about anything from Mr. Gaza and friends...

This space not for rent...
vancefox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1029
Merit: 1005



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:56:58 PM
 #17375

LOL The Gawtards gave up attacking in here and use others OPs to do so.

Check out this quote:

881 pages of opinions all written by not more than 20 people while GAW's customers can be counted in thousands. A nice hater lounge you have there, full of newbies posting memes all day Cheesy

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=923897.msg10220499#msg10220499
Only 20 people in here writing opinions in contrast to the thousands of customers who just love GAWD.

Oh, our buddy bitgeek is alive. Well, he was never good at math or stats, so that's fine. Nice to see him sticking with GAW through ups and downs, mostly downs recently. Ask him how much XPY he's hodling and what's the cost basis.


Problem is that not all of it is opinion... there's a whole metric fuck ton of posts from "dear leader" and friends... So... by his math, we have way more "thousands" of opinions...

Oh and that pesky thing called archives and actual code seems to be here... not there...

This space not for rent...
KC6TTR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 08:59:50 PM
 #17376

The more I think about this, the more I wonder... what ever in Garza's twisted mind justified his reasoning in requiring his moderators sign NDA's in addition to agreeing to the ever-changing 11+ page TOS he already had?

Likewise, were ANY of the moderators sent 1099 forms for tax purposes if they made more than US$600 in 2014, which wouldn't take long if paid $150/week (specifically, 1 month)... hmm.....

Scott-

AnimoEsto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155
Merit: 100


View Profile WWW
January 20, 2015, 09:13:15 PM
 #17377

Likewise, were ANY of the moderators sent 1099 forms for tax purposes if they made more than US$600 in 2014, which wouldn't take long if paid $150/week (specifically, 1 month)... hmm.....

Scott-

Yes we were Smiley

████→→       ● DeepOnion                                                                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯ 
████→→       ● Tor integrated, 100% anonymous!                                       Get Your FREE Coins NOW!     
████→→       ● Free Airdrop! (No ICO, No Crowdfund)                       ✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯✯
MOB
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 487
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 09:16:08 PM
 #17378

The more I think about this, the more I wonder... what ever in Garza's twisted mind justified his reasoning in requiring his moderators sign NDA's in addition to agreeing to the ever-changing 11+ page TOS he already had?

Likewise, were ANY of the moderators sent 1099 forms for tax purposes if they made more than US$600 in 2014, which wouldn't take long if paid $150/week (specifically, 1 month)... hmm.....

Scott-



They have until the end of this month for 1099s. Good question though.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1805



View Profile
January 20, 2015, 09:32:35 PM
 #17379

So here is the dilemma. Many if no most of the purchases during the cheap XPY fiasco were made by Paycoin's greatest fans - ones who were keeping BTC in Paybase waiting for an opportunity. Will GAW reverse those transactions and alienate what's remaining of its loyal following? Or will GAW let them cash out and dump the coins? This should be interesting.

https://hashtalk.org/topic/29788

ikeboy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 20, 2015, 09:55:16 PM
 #17380

So here is the dilemma. Many if no most of the purchases during the cheap XPY fiasco were made by Paycoin's greatest fans - ones who were keeping BTC in Paybase waiting for an opportunity. Will GAW reverse those transactions and alienate what's remaining of its loyal following? Or will GAW let them cash out and dump the coins? This should be interesting.

https://hashtalk.org/topic/29788

GAW would never screw its customers! Oh wait, wrong company. Lol.
Pages: « 1 ... 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 [869] 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 ... 2453 »
  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!