So yes, I know what I'm talking about
Fair enough, I'm a little worked up at the moment, this stupid move selling UKYO's shares for 100 bitcoin is insane.
Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 43. (Read 771276 times)
February 04, 2014, 09:55:24 AM
Fair enough, I'm a little worked up at the moment, this stupid move selling UKYO's shares for 100 bitcoin is insane.
February 04, 2014, 09:53:36 AM
As a user affected by the weexchange mess, I really blame Ken that is liquidating Ukyo's shares to get his debt back before other users.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
The shares have a lien on them. You are hereby notified that if the ~100 BTC is not paid in the next 10 days, we will sell your shares to the public to satisfy your debt to the company. Should the shares not satisfy your debt to the company you will still be liable for the remaining debt. Any amouts over the debt will be disperse to you less any cost of the sale.
but now that with the current prices he only can earn 100XBT in total, there will be no "amounts over".As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
Back to you Mr Pom, as I said you're right about Ken doing this the wrong way, however you're wrong about this damaging UKYO's chances to give back the Bitcoin his stole from you. Those shares would never sell above 0.0005, in fact with all things considered that's too much of a premium.
Ken is wrong selling the shares at any price. Getting back HIS debt before everyone else puts him in wrong. Even selling shares at 0.0005 and getting 100XBT, those money should be split among ALL the weexchange users and not paying him before. So it's wrong from the beginning.
As a user affected by the weexchange mess
By the way, if you believe the weexchange is a mess then you're delusional and should probably stop posting. UKYO stole funds and lost, he stole your money so stop defending him. An exchange never needs to run a fractional reserve. The fact you call the theft a "mess" shows us all you don't know what your talking about.
I don't want to discuss about SCAM or not SCAM here. I'm following this "mess" closely (as you can see, I'm tracking every information since the beginning: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/weexchange-issue-the-fall-of-ukyo-iii-updates-and-references-342122) and the situation is complicated, the intervention of Danny from Neo&Bee complicated even more. So yes, I know what I'm talking about
February 04, 2014, 09:52:32 AM
Well in all fairness Ken did say he was going to do this. This shouldn't be a surprise. To me this is a great deal even if AMC has just the 6 avalons running and thats it. As much as I hate pure mining, this is still something to take advantage of, since we know the whole situation with the sale. UKYO has proven to me personally that he is worthless, since he didn't have the decency to respond back to me about my bitfunder situation. Ken has always been very respponsive to me via PM. How can anyone blame Ken for being tight lipped after the VE situation. People just need to look at the bigger picture and stop using their amygdalas for making decisions on how to act. All those that were on their high horse a few weeks ago about I can't wait to snap up some cheap shares.....here is your gift.
February 04, 2014, 09:49:47 AM
I don't understand what's behind all this commotion.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
The asks got dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005, a 20-fold decrease, not 200.
See? Only twenty-fold decreese. Nothing to get wound up about!
That's at the previous ask. With the sentiment I see around here, an optimistic peg of the price would have been 0.005 (10-fold decrease) and on the low end 0.00075 - 0.001 (50% off and even less). But that's not the problem, the problem is Ken not making it possible for the weak hands to get out.
February 04, 2014, 09:49:04 AM
Ken is trying to do it, no matters whether it will succeed or not, he could lower the price again.
Ken is trying to fuck everyone with shares that he doesn't own, crashing price for his shareholders and stealing a possible way to get some money back to weexchange users.
If this last part could be used against Ken in the legal action against Weexchange (I'm still not sure about it, I'm researching), we'll do it
Ken is trying to fuck everyone with shares that he doesn't own, crashing price for his shareholders and stealing a possible way to get some money back to weexchange users.
If this last part could be used against Ken in the legal action against Weexchange (I'm still not sure about it, I'm researching), we'll do it
Everything you said here makes sense.
Guys, we are on the wrong side of the argument this time. This chaos over the stupid 100 bitcoin is such a misdirection it's not even funny. It's almost as if it was planned...
February 04, 2014, 09:46:52 AM
By the way, the panic buying will get us down to 140,000 at most. Unfortunately this wall will be with us until the end.
Soon people will freak out and start putting up 0.00049 walls and Ken will be forced to keep moving the wall lower and lower. I expect panic in the next few weeks because people who expected the wall to sell out realising their mistake. Once they do all those 0.0005 shares people bought will be moved down forcing Ken's "firesale" to either end or go to the next bargain level.
Soon people will freak out and start putting up 0.00049 walls and Ken will be forced to keep moving the wall lower and lower. I expect panic in the next few weeks because people who expected the wall to sell out realising their mistake. Once they do all those 0.0005 shares people bought will be moved down forcing Ken's "firesale" to either end or go to the next bargain level.
February 04, 2014, 09:46:00 AM
As a user affected by the weexchange mess, I really blame Ken that is liquidating Ukyo's shares to get his debt back before other users.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
The shares have a lien on them. You are hereby notified that if the ~100 BTC is not paid in the next 10 days, we will sell your shares to the public to satisfy your debt to the company. Should the shares not satisfy your debt to the company you will still be liable for the remaining debt. Any amouts over the debt will be disperse to you less any cost of the sale.
but now that with the current prices he only can earn 100XBT in total, there will be no "amounts over".As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
I believe you're missing the more important point: It's not possible for Ken (OR ANYONE ELSE) to sell shares @ .0005 because there is no market support for that price. There's only 6.72 BTC in bids total.
I don't think that is the point.
Ken is trying to do it, no matters whether it will succeed or not, he could lower the price again.
Ken is trying to fuck everyone with shares that he doesn't own, crashing price for his shareholders and stealing a possible way to get some money back to weexchange users.
If this last part could be used against Ken in the legal action against Weexchange (I'm still not sure about it, I'm researching), we'll do it
February 04, 2014, 09:43:07 AM
As a user affected by the weexchange mess
By the way, if you believe the weexchange is a mess then you're delusional and should probably stop posting. UKYO stole funds and lost, he stole your money so stop defending him. An exchange never needs to run a fractional reserve. The fact you call the theft a "mess" shows us all you don't know what your talking about.
February 04, 2014, 09:42:31 AM
I don't understand what's behind all this commotion.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
The asks got dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005, a 20-fold decrease, not 200.
See? Only twenty-fold decreese. Nothing to get wound up about!
February 04, 2014, 09:40:14 AM
As a user affected by the weexchange mess, I really blame Ken that is liquidating Ukyo's shares to get his debt back before other users.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
The shares have a lien on them. You are hereby notified that if the ~100 BTC is not paid in the next 10 days, we will sell your shares to the public to satisfy your debt to the company. Should the shares not satisfy your debt to the company you will still be liable for the remaining debt. Any amouts over the debt will be disperse to you less any cost of the sale.
but now that with the current prices he only can earn 100XBT in total, there will be no "amounts over".As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
You're right about one thing, and wrong about another, let me explain.
You see it's wrong for Ken to be ruining your chances of getting Bitcoin back by selling all those shares in this fashion, this entire ordeal has been a joke and it worries me that Ken is ok with ruining the companies reputation further by proceeding. Lets get real, why is Ken obsessing over this 100 Bitcoin? Is our financial situation so bad that we need that money?
I have an idea Ken, sell several million of the 15 million restricted shares, because they are restricted you should price them at 0.00005. (selling 10 million still makes us 500 bitcoin)
Call it AMC-R and run it alongside AMC on the CT exchange.
Back to you Mr Pom, as I said you're right about Ken doing this the wrong way, however you're wrong about this damaging UKYO's chances to give back the Bitcoin his stole from you. Those shares would never sell above 0.0005, in fact with all things considered that's too much of a premium.
Look guys and girls, I was hopeful with Ken's latest update. The roadmap was worse but it might have had a chance, however my faith has waned since we are now having to watch the share price crash and Ken make out with the last Bitcoin as we all watch with no control. With our shares being so obviously used against us I now question Ken's loyalty to his shareholders.
February 04, 2014, 09:36:19 AM
ken, you greedy blob! stop fueling the fire that has already burned half of your garage! why don't you crawl out here and face your investors concerns and questions
February 04, 2014, 09:34:04 AM
I don't understand what's behind all this commotion.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
Are people just waking up to Ken's shiftiness?
Is it surprising that some panic buys happened when the asks got dropped from .1 to .0005 (err... two-hundred-fold)? People like "bargains," panic buying is a thing.
And there's nothing worth mentioning being sold anyhow.
Really a tempest in a teacup.
The asks got dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005, a 20-fold decrease, not 200.
February 04, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
As a user affected by the weexchange mess, I really blame Ken that is liquidating Ukyo's shares to get his debt back before other users.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
Ukyo said more than once that he intended to liquidate shares to partialy refund weexchange users. I don't know if he is in good faith, but in this way Ken is fucking one of the few hopes we have to get some money back.
He doesn't have rights on those shares more than the other weexchange users, so this is a very unfair action.
I hoped that Ken would have sold the shares at higher prices to five the differences later to Ukyo or weexchanges users, as he stated here
in a Pm with Ukyo:
The shares have a lien on them. You are hereby notified that if the ~100 BTC is not paid in the next 10 days, we will sell your shares to the public to satisfy your debt to the company. Should the shares not satisfy your debt to the company you will still be liable for the remaining debt. Any amouts over the debt will be disperse to you less any cost of the sale.
but now that with the current prices he only can earn 100XBT in total, there will be no "amounts over".As we speak things are moving for a legal action against weexchange, I need to investigate if it is possible to include Ken Slaughter and Active Mining in this action.
February 04, 2014, 09:21:55 AM
Minerpart: Ken's main responsibility is to his shareholders. Period. The investment you speak of is an extension of this responsibility, but not all encompassing of it. I think that (*regardless of the reasoning behind why*, because I do think Ken's in the right to sell Ukyo's shares) the act of using the market to retrieve company credit while withholding trading from shareholders is just straight up unethical. As shareholders, we have shares on an open market for a reason - to express our confidence in the company. This is just a big "fuck you" to shareholders from Ken.
Basically, I think it's a moot point to argue what's in our best interest when we lack the ability to express our opinions in a meaningful way: by trading our shares on an open market.
Ken: Why. The. Fuck. Do. We. Not. Have. Our. Shares.
Basically, I think it's a moot point to argue what's in our best interest when we lack the ability to express our opinions in a meaningful way: by trading our shares on an open market.
Ken: Why. The. Fuck. Do. We. Not. Have. Our. Shares.
The only possible answer is readily obvious to those willing to face it. Set aside the distraction of Ken stealing Ukyo's shares, it's useless information. Look at the price that he's selling for. Look at the volume of buys. Look at Ken's pile of nothing to show for the thousands of BTC you've given him.
February 04, 2014, 09:21:04 AM
Ken, we all know the reason we are not allowed to sell is because we are all going to sell lower than you.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
Come on Ken, stop being greedy, I want to sell too!
I estimate price stabilization at 0.0001 once we are unchained.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
I want to trade my shares.
Come on Ken, stop being greedy, I want to sell too!
I estimate price stabilization at 0.0001 once we are unchained.
February 04, 2014, 08:58:14 AM
no comment
February 04, 2014, 08:49:00 AM
Worst investment ever 
No, there are worse. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/labcoin-lawsuit-325431
February 04, 2014, 08:34:34 AM
Worst investment ever
February 04, 2014, 08:33:41 AM
interj
I agree we should have our shares back by now but that is not the issue I've been talking about.
If you want do ensure this company has the best chance of paying back the shareholder div of 0.0025 then selling these shares now to guarantee the company gets its assets back is the ONLY logical step to take.
I agree we should have our shares back by now but that is not the issue I've been talking about.
If you want do ensure this company has the best chance of paying back the shareholder div of 0.0025 then selling these shares now to guarantee the company gets its assets back is the ONLY logical step to take.
Any shred of proof that the company is legitimately making progress rather than just trying to buy time would cause them to be instantaneously sold at this price. 100 BTC is a raindrop in the ocean for 0.0025 dividends. At this point, people are just picking up Ukyo's tab held by Ken before the firesale of shares held by the public.
February 04, 2014, 08:30:13 AM
Wow...just wow....Ken do you have any respect for the shareholders ? Brings back the memories of the original ipo debacle when you put that wall up implying ukyo asked you to.
Please have some level headed advisors for consult before making decisions like this.
Please have some level headed advisors for consult before making decisions like this.
Jump to: