hes been avoiding reality for a long time, took a lot of people here with him.
I would imagine he is too busy hiding everything he owns of value right now.
What happens when he refuses to pay restitution?
Topic: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] - page 12. (Read 629685 times)
January 23, 2015, 06:20:18 PM
January 23, 2015, 09:07:51 AM
Just got a call and message from Shawn Hagerty from MSD this afternoon. Going to follow up tomorrow and post what he has to say.
Followed up with Mr. Hagerty, he had the following to say:
- Kenneth Slaughter no longer has counsel, his attorney withdrew
- Slaughter has been uncooperative with the MSD investigation and absent from scheduled meetings/hearings
- Because of his non-compliance, he has lost the privilege to an appeal for the cease and desist order
- Hagerty will recommend to his superiors at the MSD that enforcement and restitution occur
- If the Commissioners feel that restitution is necessary Slaughter will have the right to a hearing if he schedules in a timely manner
here is Shawn Hagerty's contact info for a more thorough explanation:
Shawn Hagerty
Investigator
Missouri Secretary of State, Securities Division
600 W. Main St., Box 1276
Jefferson City, MO 65102
573-526-3901
I guess this now proofs his stupid "I avoid problems and communication about them" as a real stupid character sign. What does he think to get from hiding? Is he avoiding reality? Guess we have to make a character check on each bitcoin entrepreneur before someone invests. *sigh*
January 23, 2015, 04:08:55 AM
This truly does show his true character....
Followed up with Mr. Hagerty, he had the following to say:
here is Shawn Hagerty's contact info for a more thorough explanation:
Shawn Hagerty
Investigator
Missouri Secretary of State, Securities Division
600 W. Main St., Box 1276
Jefferson City, MO 65102
573-526-3901
Just got a call and message from Shawn Hagerty from MSD this afternoon. Going to follow up tomorrow and post what he has to say.
Followed up with Mr. Hagerty, he had the following to say:
- Kenneth Slaughter no longer has counsel, his attorney withdrew
- Slaughter has been uncooperative with the MSD investigation and absent from scheduled meetings/hearings
- Because of his non-compliance, he has lost the privilege to an appeal for the cease and desist order
- Hagerty will recommend to his superiors at the MSD that enforcement and restitution occur
- If the Commissioners feel that restitution is necessary Slaughter will have the right to a hearing if he schedules in a timely manner
here is Shawn Hagerty's contact info for a more thorough explanation:
Shawn Hagerty
Investigator
Missouri Secretary of State, Securities Division
600 W. Main St., Box 1276
Jefferson City, MO 65102
573-526-3901
January 21, 2015, 05:05:50 PM
Good! Kenny has basically admitted guilt and shown the board that he is wholly irresponsible to his shareholders. Please sizes his assets!
January 21, 2015, 04:14:57 PM
Just got a call and message from Shawn Hagerty from MSD this afternoon. Going to follow up tomorrow and post what he has to say.
Followed up with Mr. Hagerty, he had the following to say:
- Kenneth Slaughter no longer has counsel, his attorney withdrew
- Slaughter has been uncooperative with the MSD investigation and absent from scheduled meetings/hearings
- Because of his non-compliance, he has lost the privilege to an appeal for the cease and desist order
- Hagerty will recommend to his superiors at the MSD that enforcement and restitution occur
- If the Commissioners feel that restitution is necessary Slaughter will have the right to a hearing if he schedules in a timely manner
here is Shawn Hagerty's contact info for a more thorough explanation:
Shawn Hagerty
Investigator
Missouri Secretary of State, Securities Division
600 W. Main St., Box 1276
Jefferson City, MO 65102
573-526-3901
January 20, 2015, 08:20:23 PM
Just got a call and message from Shawn Hagerty from MSD this afternoon. Going to follow up tomorrow and post what he has to say.
January 19, 2015, 04:39:02 PM
I wonder what metric they use to decide what the settlement should be?
Based on other stuff, refund of fiat value at time of IPO would be considered by a court to be full recompense.
This could lead to a situation where they consider that if BTC was $80 at IPO and $300 at time of settlement, that they think that if 0.25 has been paid out, and they assume that you have that in hand, that Ken only owes you $5 per BTC invested.
The problem is, the activemining shares exist on crypto trade platform. It only uses btc. Shouldn't he be force to do a buy back in btc? I don't recall any private issued shares? No doubt Kenny was hoping all this would happen while the shares were all in limbo.
"Illegal securities, officer? What illegal securities? Nothin here but us intellihashs"
January 18, 2015, 10:02:02 AM
Indeed!
None of us know exactly how ken spent our money, where it went...we've been kept so much in the dark, that that alone is enough to warrant investigation, MSD review, penalties if necessary. If he tried honestly and failed honestly, lets see the numbers. If he cant account he is, in our eyes, and the eyes of the law, guilty.
Yeah, poor fuckin ken. Nobody wants to cut the guy a break, eh Zum? How about you send me a few dozen BTC and I'll... get back to you sometime in the future with your profits, or not. I\m working on a NDA thing thats totally hush hush but for sure will make your BTC shine (hint; its a dishwasher that cleans Cassicus coins)
None of us know exactly how ken spent our money, where it went...we've been kept so much in the dark, that that alone is enough to warrant investigation, MSD review, penalties if necessary. If he tried honestly and failed honestly, lets see the numbers. If he cant account he is, in our eyes, and the eyes of the law, guilty.
Yeah, poor fuckin ken. Nobody wants to cut the guy a break, eh Zum? How about you send me a few dozen BTC and I'll... get back to you sometime in the future with your profits, or not. I\m working on a NDA thing thats totally hush hush but for sure will make your BTC shine (hint; its a dishwasher that cleans Cassicus coins)
I was pushing this everytime I posted here. Sometime to get deleted by master shill zumzero who was blindly optimistic without a single proof and totally ignoring every warning or reasonable debate. I bet that VMC never sent any money to eASIC because there was never a project. There was only a signed NDA to fool the fools. Since no shareholder demanded any proof from Ken he was free to do whatever the fuck he wanted with your money. Only because you (shareholders) let him fool you without a single proof.
January 17, 2015, 02:10:51 PM
I was probably the most vocal supporter of Ken's dream and that's because I trully belived in it myself. But even my generally optomistic self can accept I backed the wrong horse in this instance. Financially it hurt me a lot but I'd never want to share with the majority of twisted people who frequent this forum, just how badly. And yet, with all that has happened I still maintain that Ken tried his best and genuinely wanted to to make his shareholders successful. He failed on that and I'm sure it will have a more profound effect on him as a human being than many of you would care to accept or acknowledge. Some of the hate that exists in this space is perhaps the worst I have ever witnessed in humanity and even with that I still hold hope for all, as irrespective of the sides we've chosen, perhaps we might agree that it is long overdue that the common person becomes empowered to change the world for the betterment of their species using bitcoin and similar decentralised solutions. All is fair in love and war. Best of luck to you all.
Ken should have returned all the investors money the moment the eASIC deal fell through.
Ken did not know what he was talking about, he constantly got basic Bitcoin terminology confused and lied to us about the progress he was making.
If he had said after eASIC, sorry guys, I screwed up, here is some of your money back. Then he could have been forgiven. Bad business.
The fact is, he screwed up and just kept on going with it.
If he had given us back even 30% of our investment before the price spike, many of us would have been in profit.
I may not be remembering correctly, but we found out that the eASIC deal died before the price increase. I could be wrong.
January 16, 2015, 04:37:34 PM
Indeed!
None of us know exactly how ken spent our money, where it went...we've been kept so much in the dark, that that alone is enough to warrant investigation, MSD review, penalties if necessary. If he tried honestly and failed honestly, lets see the numbers. If he cant account he is, in our eyes, and the eyes of the law, guilty.
Yeah, poor fuckin ken. Nobody wants to cut the guy a break, eh Zum? How about you send me a few dozen BTC and I'll... get back to you sometime in the future with your profits, or not. I\m working on a NDA thing thats totally hush hush but for sure will make your BTC shine (hint; its a dishwasher that cleans Cassicus coins)
None of us know exactly how ken spent our money, where it went...we've been kept so much in the dark, that that alone is enough to warrant investigation, MSD review, penalties if necessary. If he tried honestly and failed honestly, lets see the numbers. If he cant account he is, in our eyes, and the eyes of the law, guilty.
Yeah, poor fuckin ken. Nobody wants to cut the guy a break, eh Zum? How about you send me a few dozen BTC and I'll... get back to you sometime in the future with your profits, or not. I\m working on a NDA thing thats totally hush hush but for sure will make your BTC shine (hint; its a dishwasher that cleans Cassicus coins)
January 16, 2015, 01:13:47 AM
I was probably the most vocal supporter of Ken's dream and that's because I trully belived in it myself. But even my generally optomistic self can accept I backed the wrong horse in this instance. Financially it hurt me a lot but I'd never want to share with the majority of twisted people who frequent this forum, just how badly. And yet, with all that has happened I still maintain that Ken tried his best and genuinely wanted to to make his shareholders successful. He failed on that and I'm sure it will have a more profound effect on him as a human being than many of you would care to accept or acknowledge. Some of the hate that exists in this space is perhaps the worst I have ever witnessed in humanity and even with that I still hold hope for all, as irrespective of the sides we've chosen, perhaps we might agree that it is long overdue that the common person becomes empowered to change the world for the betterment of their species using bitcoin and similar decentralised solutions. All is fair in love and war. Best of luck to you all.
Oh goody, our favorite drama queen apologist Zummy is back.
Tell us more about how LabKen's detractors are perhaps the most hateful humans EVAR, worse than even Boko Haram or Pol Pot. Because we dared to speak the truth.
ACTM had a huge stack of BTC and could have used them to buy boatloads of chips from any number of qualified vendors.
But no, it was more important to pretend LabKen's homespun ASIC had a chance in hell of competing with designs from qualified professionals.
And you backed that fantasy, to the hilt, all the way down to zero. For shame Zummy. For shame.
January 15, 2015, 10:11:36 PM
^Nah, you were taken by a lowbrow conman from Missouri. It's f8ckin' hilarious, in light of you being repeatedly warned. In light of you trying to silence & ban the people doing the warning.
Stop trying to turn it into a Greek tragedy because my sides.
Stop trying to turn it into a Greek tragedy because my sides.
January 15, 2015, 08:40:33 PM
I was probably the most vocal supporter of Ken's dream and that's because I trully belived in it myself. But even my generally optomistic self can accept I backed the wrong horse in this instance. Financially it hurt me a lot but I'd never want to share with the majority of twisted people who frequent this forum, just how badly. And yet, with all that has happened I still maintain that Ken tried his best and genuinely wanted to to make his shareholders successful. He failed on that and I'm sure it will have a more profound effect on him as a human being than many of you would care to accept or acknowledge. Some of the hate that exists in this space is perhaps the worst I have ever witnessed in humanity and even with that I still hold hope for all, as irrespective of the sides we've chosen, perhaps we might agree that it is long overdue that the common person becomes empowered to change the world for the betterment of their species using bitcoin and similar decentralised solutions. All is fair in love and war. Best of luck to you all.
January 08, 2015, 01:22:05 PM
I wonder what metric they use to decide what the settlement should be?
Based on other stuff, refund of fiat value at time of IPO would be considered by a court to be full recompense.
This could lead to a situation where they consider that if BTC was $80 at IPO and $300 at time of settlement, that they think that if 0.25 has been paid out, and they assume that you have that in hand, that Ken only owes you $5 per BTC invested.
^possible - but it depends on a lot of things:
1) lots of investors were getting involved when btc was >$500
2) does Ken have any assets left in the business, or have all assets been sold and there is only an unpiad debt?
3) is there reason to beleive that ken's personal assets (car, home, bank acct) were funded from ACTM/VMC, or should otherwise be liquidated to compensate the investors.
4) Is ken being seen as an owner of a bankrupt business, or a fraudster running unlicensed securities that stole from unsavvy investors
January 08, 2015, 08:35:52 AM
I wonder what metric they use to decide what the settlement should be?
Based on other stuff, refund of fiat value at time of IPO would be considered by a court to be full recompense.
This could lead to a situation where they consider that if BTC was $80 at IPO and $300 at time of settlement, that they think that if 0.25 has been paid out, and they assume that you have that in hand, that Ken only owes you $5 per BTC invested.
January 08, 2015, 07:32:23 AM
That would be fantastic. He promised 100% return on IPO price. Paid only 0.25% in divs... I wonder what metric they use to decide what the settlement should be?
Will the settlement be paid out via crypto trade I wonder? Damn, I'm desperate.
Will the settlement be paid out via crypto trade I wonder? Damn, I'm desperate.
January 08, 2015, 07:16:27 AM
I don't get it. They can just not go ahead and just leave it at that? What is the point?
Most likely a settlement is being drafted IMO
January 07, 2015, 09:28:07 PM
I don't get it. They can just not go ahead and just leave it at that? What is the point?
January 07, 2015, 03:28:06 PM
News on the hearing progress in case anyone is interested but not in touch with the MSD.
Hagerty, Shawn to me
12:02 PM EST, Jan. 7, 2015
Cheers!
Hagerty, Shawn to me
12:02 PM EST, Jan. 7, 2015
Quote
Mr. Kleeck,
No hearing was held yesterday and it has yet to be rescheduled. Please check back with me in a couple of weeks. I may have more information by then.
Thanks,
Shawn
No hearing was held yesterday and it has yet to be rescheduled. Please check back with me in a couple of weeks. I may have more information by then.
Thanks,
Shawn
Cheers!
January 06, 2015, 05:00:29 PM
You're right. I shouldn't post at4 am. Still... The profits were negligible. and now i'm recalling some video of racks. that didnt work out too well either. anyone got a copy of the dividend history? I recall he returned IPO price only 0.25% or some such. ? 
?
? Jump to: