Topic: bitbond (amazingrando) (Read 4367 times)

amazingrando got scammer tag.

I think, since he got tagged "scammer", he doesn't have to fear, here after.
Coz so far not many scammers gave back coins & removed the scammer tag.
1 or 2 somewhat did good, even though its not full, example - nefario giving back coins & assets.

The shutdown of GLBSE by nefario, actually showed the true face of many asset creators/owners ugly face.

yes
but how much more simplified can it get then a copy of the contract and a link to the bitbond listing showing 0 payments

Admittedly there's good reason for that: 1 BTC deals rarely get as complicated, with as many parties involved and so forth.

And back to this sub forum with no answer

Well that confirms things

Admin are quite fine with allowing a clear scam to happen with no response

Someone defaulting on a 1btc loan is taken care of same day though

moved to meta.

i would like an explanation from the forum admin why someone blatantly breaking a contract is not tagged


maybe the ignored scam topic(s) were missed, maybe the PM was missed, but can a topic in forum related topics be missed?

Interesting indeed. I wonder where he got the money from to buy useless stuff like that...

Interesting!

Seeing how recently Tom got his....

still no resolution

yet the forum allows him to stay un tagged as a scammer


makes you wonder who those preferred investors who are still being paid out are.......

admin responsible for tagging scammers has been notified about this thread and the poll thread

evidence abound. person to be tagged admitting in his own words about defaulting on the contract


yet no tag given


you've got to ask yourself.. why?

Thanks for your kind words!

I love it how he tried to "name and shame" Josh & BFL because they didn't "honor" his "order":


Haha, big surprise there!

Hey scammingrandy, I have an idea! Why don't you stop making a fool of yourself and start paying back your debt?

This statement:


Is contradicted by his next two bullets:


And also by the fact that he paid off the 85%.  It's rather clear that everyone did not have the same terms.  The 15% for all intents and purposes was subordinated debt without the bond holders knowledge. 

I'm sorry for all of you that lost money to this guy, I'm with the majority here, this guy needs to be tagged until he makes all his bond holders whole.

he has now locked the discussion thread quoted above


now i have to ask why is he not tagged yet?


it is not disputable that he defaulted. he details it in his thread

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitbond-update-and-request-for-feedback-141139

here he is admitting to the scam

no where in the contract he posted does any of this apply

he owes 2mh/sec 105%pps from october 5th till today
and owes upgrades to 12.5mh when hardware becomes available

Ugh, Randy Oest is a really bad artist:

http://wizardoest.deviantart.com/gallery/

Even Adolf Hitler had more talent:

http://www.bytwerk.com/gpa/hitlerpaintings.htm

Well I know where my next PM is being sent


If he's really in Indiana maybe I'll have to take a trip across the state and have a fire sale of equipment on eBay

He is still mining at Bitminter with ~160Gh/s
So he is roling in the Btc.

He must still have quite a mining farm somewhere at a physical location.

If you don't tag him now, the 85% of his investors (those he gave to by stealing from you) will quietly continue to support him, and in a few months / one year tops he'll be back playing like he's respectable, trustworthy, and clean.

What you should do, more importantly than the tag, is find out who the fuck those 85% assholes are, and tag THEM.

And in general, as standing policy, whenever someone gets a secret arrangement sweetening a public deal, find out who, tag THEM. They're the real fraudsters in all of this.

I lost $6,000 of personal money because of amazingrando.

Then I hope he will like this free advertising:
http://amazingrand0.blogspot.com

everybody is invited to add in the comments.

I am sure!

He is a computer enthausiast from Indianapolis.

Are you sure, or is just that this guy has the same nick?

Preferential treatment or different classes of shares wasnt mentioned in the contract for this asset. That there were 85% of holders who were "guaranteed" is proof enough for a breach of contract and misrepresentation of what was being sold.

This is the guy you are searching for: https://twitter.com/amazingrando Randy Oest aka Amazing Rando aka amazingrando

You cannot, even if they tag him: he could reappear under 100 different nicknames, unless someone release his identity too (Nefario, can you hear me?).
Moreover, recovering what he stole at least in part or exact revenge in any other way would be "educative" for wannabe scammers too, much more than a forum tag. That's why I am proposing some more serious effort than asking for a tag.

But I agree that not tagging him and Giga smells much fishy about this forum's management.

For his current investors, yes. As I understand it, a scammer tag is intended to warn new investors who are not familiar with him. I don't care if I recover anything from my bitbonds -- it was *my* mistake to buy them and I should have known better. I was aware of the risks but somehow got sucked in. Anyway, losses are the price an investor pays for his education. I consider it more important to prevent him from coming back and continuing his scam (or starting another one) than to recover anything. If he doesn't get a scammer tag then it is proof that there is something very, very wrong with bitcointalk.

this.

or how about we remove the scammer tags entirely and the scam accusations sub forum if it's not going to be used


this is just step one to anything that will result from this

the forum has the capabilities of labeling a user (who is still logging in and has posted quite a few times since payments stopped)

do it


what follows next we'll see. but i'll do whatever i can to help down someone who openly steals 6,000 btc to fund his mining hardware.

not tagging scammers at all is even less effective.

Look, I think that tagging scammers after the fact is quite ineffective when they are gone with the money.
As Bitbond owners, we would better think to some way to try to recover at least part of our coins.
So I suggest to launch a bounty, like offering a part (like 30%) of whatever anyone can recover of our assets. We might sign a contract and/or find an escrow to make it serious. If any other Bitbond holders agree on this: speak now, or forever hold your peace.

Alternatively, if I were a hacker I would probably have tried to do him any sort of bad jokes to exact revenge, but that is up to anyone qualified and motivated for himself.

the contract was weekly dividends


quote from his bitbond thread

"Regarding coupon payments since GLBSE closed, 85% has been paid to the largest investors (working from largest bondholder down).  I would like to be able to pay the remaining 15% immediately, but doing so would mean canceling our ASIC pre-order and losing the pre-order slot.

I'm hoping that BITBOND's ASICs will ship by the end of January, only 4 weeks from now.  Once I receive them and have them running, I would like to offer a free upgrade high enough to pay ongoing weekly coupons plus pay the gap between GLBSE and ASIC mining in relatively short order."



that is not weekly dividends. it's an open-shut case. he is right there admitting to the scam accusation.



your move bitcointalk.org. does he get to continue not being labeled as a scammer?



maybe you're part of the biggest investors who got paid already? now that would not surprise me



if i defaulted on a 1 btc loan i'd be labeled within a day. if i stole 120 thousand dollars worth of btc nothing would happen

--edit--
no response to mine and others scam accusation threads

no response to multiple pms

move thread to meta (forum discussion) gets moved back with no discussion or answer
--




this guy needs tagged now.

there is no way to defend what he is doing and has done. the forum will show it's true colors if he is allowed to continue as a non scam marked member


I am personally owed to this point 105%pps of 2MH for 112 shares going back to early October 2012

from looking at the cryptostocks page

"Shares held publicly   95,260"

i estimate he owes a bit under 6,000 BTC to shareholders for payments going back to October. (rough estimate using another funds 1mh dividends since October)


if any admin is not willing to tag him as a scamer feel free to buy shares if you are so confident (there are unfilled sell orders for half a bitcent)


there is already a poll thread
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-bitbond-amazingrando-136803
vote turn out so far is 47 yes to 3 no (i'd LOVE to see who the 3 no's are)


"Quote from: amazingrando on December 06, 2012, 01:41:14 PM
...
Regarding dividends for the period between GLBSE closure and now, the plan is still evolving.  The vast majority of bonds (85%) are held by a small group of investors.  Their buy-in of bonds came with additional requirements and legal contracts that have required that I pay their payouts before other parties.  They have been paid all coupon payments going back to the GLBSE closure.

For those of you who constitute the remaining 15%, the earnings from GLBSE closure is not lost.  I am working on a plan that will give you a few options including payouts, buyback, and ASIC upgrade.  I hope to share details of that this weekend."


i think we can all agree it's past the weekend of december 6th
and where in the contract does it state these 95,000 shares are low priority?



I demand for myself and all others to be paid dividends now (and continued weekly) or a refund of the btc amount paid on glbse minus dividends to date