May I suggest that those who acted as escrow agents waive the fee(s)? It'll make their brands more viable via not profiting off this unfortunate episode.
Well, there is a lot of accounting work ahead of us (calculating everything and paying back isn't going to be easy). However, that is already being considered. This is just a "preliminary statement" so that people calm down and stop spamming this thread with nonsense. People should be both thankful and relaxed, considering that we have potentially moved down from a loss rate of ~92.5% (technically 50% in reality if the <10 BTC claim is true) to a maximum of ~25%.
You are telling about that Escrow are considering about waiving the escrow fees but why should they charge escrow fees when they are also properly held as a associate to this scam because who ever invested in this IPO is mostly after seeing the escrow persons involved in this, it looked so much legit but now we are seeing that even with you all are being the escrow persons this scam happened why because due to you forget the first rule of escrow is to get the funds directly to the escrow address from the investors and not to be get from the IPO runners.
But i am really happy to know that you all are working hard to get back the invested bitcoins, but still their are so many loop holes to be cleared so that next time this type of scam should not be happened.
I might as well quote your reply in re escrows, albeit any other priorly echoing the expressed sentiment would've sufficed.
I'll soon be reintroducing
YuTü.Ço.in seeking ICO funding, strongly toying with having in place a trusted escrow agent acting as an intermediary doling out funds on an as-needed basis during the nascent stage of the endeavor, thus insuring initial investors-cum-users' investments.
Said agent will only deduct the agreed-upon prevailing fee percentage to their coffer per each requested quasi-certified transaction oppose to during distribution of the entire fund on account on demand to the venture's control. I envision more than one funding round employing the same practice, with subsequent round requests not put forth till previous rounds met scrutiny.
Yes, I'm versed that such a process outlined above is readily available via other platforms, but opting to forego their use in accomplishing the same feat less formally on the Bitcointalk forum since here ICOs are all the rage. I feel that such an approach is
morer betterer then what has been demonstrated to date, if you get my drift.
Apologies for this post being self-serving, but ... ah, fuck it! I'm not apologizing. I'll just pretend that I earned the privilege due to my participation in this thread.
That said, any escrow dudes reading this wanna be my money dude? PM me if so, but please be aware that you'll be vetted (that's a twist) during the consideration process.
Bruno
PS: Thank you, Michael Adair, for doing what's right. Hit me up once this episode clears up if you want to bring some of your skillsets to my venture's table, e.g. web design, whereupon you'll be paid accordingly for your services [unless Ivan and I make a run for it to the Costa Rican border to retire among the
peleides blue morphos a stone's throw from the former
Laissez Faire City].