GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)

[Oldminer]

And yet they are ready to launch a MAJOR and MIND BLOWING coin accepting by major retailers blahblahblah... This is why we have so many doubts.

Yea well thats the thing, they only care about the next new customer not the existing ones. Once they have your money you go to the back of the queue.

All I want to do is sell my last remaining 3mhs multihashlet which is making me 0.00000001BTC/day after maintenance fees (which interestingly never came down from day 1 though payouts did & continue to do so) and withdraw my last $20 so I can forget about the operation entirely.

[alienesb]

Things have changed.

No doubt about it. It was much better back in the old days when we were complaining about our Blades going down... again. More real miners talking instead of "investors."

[volder]

Volder, the claims may very well be unfounded but part of the reason they're being made is that you said many times that you signed an NDA with GAW.  You've also said things like "Can't tell you what's coming but hold on to your seat, it's going to be good types of comments" in the early days of Zen.  I personally haven't heard you make this type of comments for a while but you can't blame people for thinking that you may be privy to things they don't know.

I don't disagree. I don't blame anyone. It is what it is, what's done is done. That was a long time ago.

[bitcoinnoisseur]

Yeah I honestly didn't figure you were in a position to share what you really think but figured I'd ask.  Thanks.

Yes he is determined to make it successful.  However having said that, the question is does he have the ability to pull it off and is there truly room in the market for it or is the hype all false?

It'll be a bumpy ride, but he'll pull it off.

Honestly, I do not believe for a minute that it IS in his hands. I believe it is entirely in the hands of the crypto-currency world, the general public that may use it and the supposed large bankers and VCs. I can not believe they met with him and were blown away by anything he said and that they fully trust him with their money. He may think hes running the show but when you insert large bankers and VC's into a no name company run by a no name individual with all this controversy, then it is they that are "pulling it off".

[cryptofunk]

Volder, the claims may very well be unfounded but part of the reason they're being made is that you said many times that you signed an NDA with GAW.  You've also said things like "Can't tell you what's coming but hold on to your seat, it's going to be good types of comments" in the early days of Zen.  I personally haven't heard you make this type of comments for a while but you can't blame people for thinking that you may be privy to things they don't know.

I don't disagree. I don't blame anyone. It is what it is, what's done is done. That was a long time ago.

Wouldn't want to be in your shoes.  From chatting with you many times on TMB irc channel I know you got in that position truly wanting to help GAW in the early beginning.

Things have changed.

No doubt about it. It was much better back in the old days when we were complaining about our Blades going down... again. More real miners talking instead of "investors."

Funny, I remember it like it was yesterday!

[wdl1908]

Ok, so I opened another ticket last night because GAW support closed my first ticket after 2 mths because they couldnt fix the issue (unable to split or sell a hashlet), and this morning they have closed it already with a reply 'unable to locate an account for this email address' even though they were able to locate my account previously 

This is just horrible customer relations. They didnt even reply to ask me what my username was or anything this time..haha

So..I've opened a THIRD ticket. This time Ive added in my email address and username. Lets see how we go this time, though I'm not anticipating a solution.......

I think you need to open an account on freshdesk with the same email address as your account on zencloud.

[Oldminer]

I think you need to open an account on freshdesk with the same email address as your account on zencloud.

Yea this has been done and someone has my ticket. Hoping they sort this soon so I can sell while my hashlets are still worth something & get the hell out of Dodge.

[MOB]

Volder, the claims may very well be unfounded but part of the reason they're being made is that you said many times that you signed an NDA with GAW.  You've also said things like "Can't tell you what's coming but hold on to your seat, it's going to be good types of comments" in the early days of Zen.  I personally haven't heard you make this type of comments for a while but you can't blame people for thinking that you may be privy to things they don't know.

I don't disagree. I don't blame anyone. It is what it is, what's done is done. That was a long time ago.

You have any comment on the below, Volder?  (apologies to everyone who has heard me beat this dead horse)

My prior comments were:
Josh has stated, unequivocally, that Zenpool profits are paid out on:
1. private rentals
2. mining
3. day-trading
4. undisclosed other activities.

Your profits payouts are not a 1MH share of a mining pool, but a share of quite a few other activities in which MH does not even figure (like in day trading).

What is a security?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77b

The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security”, or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.


edit: I wonder if the "Zenpool negotiations" are Josh's attempt to either legally insulate himself against this very real federal crime, or perhaps a way to buy time to seek compliance without acknowledging the real reason?

[corygto]

Volder, the claims may very well be unfounded but part of the reason they're being made is that you said many times that you signed an NDA with GAW.  You've also said things like "Can't tell you what's coming but hold on to your seat, it's going to be good types of comments" in the early days of Zen.  I personally haven't heard you make this type of comments for a while but you can't blame people for thinking that you may be privy to things they don't know.

I don't disagree. I don't blame anyone. It is what it is, what's done is done. That was a long time ago.

You have any comment on the below, Volder?  (apologies to everyone who has heard me beat this dead horse)

My prior comments were:
Josh has stated, unequivocally, that Zenpool profits are paid out on:
1. private rentals
2. mining
3. day-trading
4. undisclosed other activities.

Your profits payouts are not a 1MH share of a mining pool, but a share of quite a few other activities in which MH does not even figure (like in day trading).

What is a security?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77b

The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security”, or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.

Have you reported this to the proper authorities?

[volder]

You have any comment on the below, Volder?

Nope.

[jimmothy]

You have any comment on the below, Volder?  (apologies to everyone who has heard me beat this dead horse)

My prior comments were:
Josh has stated, unequivocally, that Zenpool profits are paid out on:
1. private rentals
2. mining
3. day-trading
4. undisclosed other activities.

Your profits payouts are not a 1MH share of a mining pool, but a share of quite a few other activities in which MH does not even figure (like in day trading).

What is a security?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77b

The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security”, or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.

You're trying too hard. Cloudmining by itself is by definition a security. It's a profit sharing agreement, period.

There no amount of wording/obfuscation that will make it exempt from security laws/regulations.

[GAW Miners_CEO]

Figured since everyone was making an appearance, I wold too

First,  I am curious. Why doesn't the whole "tell the truth" thing apply both ways? You guys demand GAW is truthful and transparent, yet you guys are not. You have posters literally just making things up. For example, that Scott guy has resorted to just making up facts, without a shred of proof. Most here don't bother to do any real research and present any real facts.

For example, I consistently see you guys talk about "every" person that talks negatively getting censored, yet there are negative comments about us all over the place on the HT. Additionally, I just counted all the people that have ever been banned by me, and its less then 100 users, which represents less then 1% of the active users there. How is that "everyone"?

Notice that when I defend the companies position, I typically use numbers and facts. Most of the posters here just make things up, focus on what supports their position and ignore the things that don't. You guys were all over our TOS with it mentioned virtual miners, and now that it references physical miners, no one brings it up anymore? Focus on what makes us look bad, and ignore the things that don't.

Not to mention most of the posters here buy from us! if we are so bad, why would you want to do business with us?

If you think we are violating securities laws, and the team of attorneys and all the investor relationships are are forming are some how missing that, then report us. But why keep talking about it? You guys honestly think its more believable that with all the capital and visibility we have that it makes more sense for us to be breaking the law and scamming people, then us building this company to sell for billions one day? Again, you just choose to ignore what makes your view make sense, and make up the missing information.

You guys still claim we have no miners, based on what proof? Because I refuse to not disclose my total Hash rate? Right......it makes more sense to believe that I don't really have any (despite all the pictures, etc) and for some reason I spend millions on miners that I never hook up. Then to believe that I don't disclose it for competitive reasons? And you guys wonder why I do not not address any of your questions?

Secondly, you guys claim that many of the posters on HT are like a cut, but what are you guys? You guys can not stand to hear anything pro GAW just as much as the posters on HT can not hear anything against GAW. I have seen people, literally, just post their opinions about us on reddit in a neutral way and get down-voted to the point there post dont even show. How is that different then anything you guys do here?

I just find it ironic that about half the points that get made on here are all about being transparent and accepting of other different perspectives when the posters here are just as biased.

I would happily answer any question that someone has when they are actually looking for an answer, not a way to drive their own agenda. But look at it from my view, how can I do that with the way things are handled here? The bottom line is, you guys only hear what you want to hear. Just like you claim HT users do.

Whether you guys believe it or not, I want the same thing you guys do. For crypto to be successful.

Anyways, its unlikely I will respond here again given they way you guys typically handle things here. And to most it will not make a difference, but to some, maybe it will. Minimally, anyone new thinking about doing business with, can read this, then come to their own conclusions.

[MOB]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

[GAW Miners_CEO]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

We have an entire team of people we are bringing for that specific reason. Compliance managers, etc. Additionally, we have already engaged with a group that specializes in helping companies obtain the proper licenses. We are well aware of the things we need to do, and we are doing them. We want crypto to become something the banks are not afraid of. We think we have a shot at that.

[volder]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

I'm pretty sure that GAW wouldn't be open to interviews with CNN and other huge media outlets if they were trying to hide behind an illegal business. Just food for thought.

[MOB]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

We have an entire team of people we are bringing for that specific reason. Compliance managers, etc. Additionally, we have already engaged with a group that specializes in helping companies obtain the proper licenses. We are well aware of the things we need to do, and we are doing them. We want crypto to become something the banks are not afraid of. We think we have a shot at that.

Thank you for the response--can you answer a bit more straight-forwardly?

1. Are you attempting to seek compliance or clarification on compliance from the SEC right now regarding potential unregistered securities violations?

2. When did such an attempt begin in earnest?

[jimmothy]

Figured since everyone was making an appearance, I wold too

First,  I am curious. Why doesn't the whole "tell the truth" thing apply both ways? You guys demand GAW is truthful and transparent, yet you guys are not. You have posters literally just making things up. For example, that Scott guy has resorted to just making up facts, without a shred of proof. Most here don't bother to do any real research and present any real facts.

What about the definitive proof that you are using new customer payments to payout "mining earnings"?

Why don't mining earnings come from actual mining?

Notice that when I defend the companies position, I typically use numbers and facts. Most of the posters here just make things up, focus on what supports their position and ignore the things that don't. You guys were all over our TOS with it mentioned virtual miners, and now that it references physical miners, no one brings it up anymore? Focus on what makes us look bad, and ignore the things that don't.

This couldn't be further from the truth. Your statements are 100% backed by faith/trust not verifiable facts.

Feel free to post your mining address if that's not true. I expect ~20 PH/s of sha-256 or 1000 GH/s of scrypt.

If you think we are violating securities laws, and the team of attorneys and all the investor relationships are are forming are some how missing that, then report us. But why keep talking about it? You guys honestly think its more believable that with all the capital and visibility we have that it makes more sense for us to be breaking the law and scamming people, then us building this company to sell for billions one day? Again, you just choose to ignore what makes your view make sense, and make up the missing information.

So basically your argument is that "we have so much money, why would we scam people?"?

I'm going to have to award you zero jimmothypoints for that excuse.

You guys still claim we have no miners, based on what proof? Because I refuse to not disclose my total Hash rate?

Yes that's exactly why. Every other legit cloudmining company has no problem disclosing their mining address, why is GAW different?

Right......it makes more sense to believe that I don't really have any (despite all the pictures, etc) and for some reason I spend millions on miners that I never hook up. Then to believe that I don't disclose it for competitive reasons? And you guys wonder why I do not not address any of your questions?

Despite all the pictures? You mean the pictures that show 1/10th of the hashrate you claim to possess? Surely you understand why we don't buy it.

Pics can be faked (not that I think yours are) but a mining address is definitive and publicly verifiable proof that the hashrate exists, take advantage of it.

I just find it ironic that about half the points that get made on here are all about being transparent and accepting of other different perspectives when the posters here are just as biased.

It's not our job to be transparent, we aren't the ones trying to sell millions of dollars worth of promises.

[MOB]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

I'm pretty sure that GAW wouldn't be open to interviews with CNN and other huge media outlets if they were trying to hide behind an illegal business. Just food for thought.

I agree, it would be incredibly foolish.

That is why I have been trying to get a full response on this issue since it first occurred to me two months ago about 12 hours after Hashlet Primes went on sale for $16/MH. Long before any CNN interviews.

[elrugrim]

Gah!  What is going on here!  This thread is for debating things like Education, World Peace, and dealing with irrational anger!  

Seriously-  Not attacking or Trashing, compliance is a good thing.   I know you don't have to share financial deals and if your unwilling to, that is fine.   However it has sounded like in the past that the latest hashing power rental negotiations had come to a close.  Not asking for details, other then, is this a correct or incorrect statement.

[GAW Miners_CEO]

Josh, in the latest cloud miner interview (with the other Scott), you mentioned talking to the SEC about compliance.

When I have brought this issue up before in email, you did not mention this step. One might assume that you too are concerned that you might be running an unregistered security and are attempting to make it legal.

That's great if so! More power to you.


However, to pretend that you are not running an unregistered security does not inspire trust. If you are attempting to become compliant to SEC regulations, then say so. No shame in that.

We have an entire team of people we are bringing for that specific reason. Compliance managers, etc. Additionally, we have already engaged with a group that specializes in helping companies obtain the proper licenses. We are well aware of the things we need to do, and we are doing them. We want crypto to become something the banks are not afraid of. We think we have a shot at that.

Thank you for the response--can you answer a bit more straight-forwardly?

1. Are you attempting to seek compliance or clarification on compliance from the SEC right now regarding potential unregistered securities violations?

2. When did such an attempt begin in earnest?

We have throughly checked to insure that we are not violating securities laws. The opinion continues to be that we are not.

But, many of the banks we have spoken to feel the risk with crypto is way too high to work with. So we are hoping through following all the "normal channels" that we can change their minds.

Thats about as specific as I can be for now.