Im going to put a time limit of a week on this, after a week if goat has not verified then I will close down all the shares and return what is left in his account (as he mentioned, about 1K BTC) to his shareholders. I will also approach him to repay the difference between what is in his account and what he owes shareholders.
Nefario.
I hadn't gotten around to mentioning this in the locked thread, but it is relevant now based on the posted action. This quote from the GLBSE 2.0 thread:
This could use a little editing for grammar, spelling and clarity.
"We do however recognised that for some users prefer for this not to be the case."
-
http://glbse.com/asset/view/BTCWoops, I'll fix that soon.
Also on the XML contracts, we're phasing them out now, over the next week I'll be adding the ability to edit the contract (which would require a vote to allow). So, with shareholder permission you'll be able to constantly keep them up to date.
and the full text from GLBSE 2.0:
It is important that the identity of the person who is selling this asset has been verified. We do however recognised that for some users prefer for this not to be the case. As a result we provide users with the information about the asset sellers identity to make the appropriate decision.
This doesn't look like it was written by someone who speaks any form of English as their primary language, and it lacks important grammar and punctuation. However, my understanding of it was that it meant something like this:
We know you may want sellers to be verified, but this is optional. You can choose not to buy assets from unverified issuers based on the information below.
You really need to edit this before you even consider taking any action like the one mentioned earlier in this thread (and quoted first in this post), and even then, considering the system was still worded like this well after Goat's account was locked, you need to be very cautious about any decision regarding his account.
Don't get me wrong, your resolution seems reasonable if he stops communicating completely or tells you to implement it as he will be abandoning GLBSE (in which case I would assume that he would certainly pay, but don't see how TyGrr [which actually has non-BTC assets involved] could be properly and fairly handled [whereas TyGrr-Bank and TyGrr-BOT are just bonds and as such should be possible to pay off at face value]).