Topic: Butterfly Labs Forced &quot;On Hold For Refund&quot; for all my Single SC orders - page 30. (Read 59178 times)

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 03:09:23 PM

Quote from: nottm28 on May 25, 2013, 04:10:33 PM

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

I just love seeing these brand new accounts coming to BFL's defense after missing 7+ months of deadlines. Quite entertianing. Thanks Josh.

+1

I find it difficult to believe there are this many people with their heads in the sand. Newbie accounts spring up everyday with nothing but carefully constructed apologies and excuses in hand for BFL's non-performance and outright deceptions.

Translation: I can't believe there are this many people who don't believe what I believe and are willing to voice opinions about it. It can't be possible. They must all be the same person

Over the past 11 months there has been a steady stream of low post count people who appear, defend BFL for a while and then disappear. First they defended BFL's power claims even though they violated the laws of physics. Then they defended the shipping dates but those fell one by one, their defenders vanished into the night. Some defended BFL's disdain for their customer base, others encouraged Josh to be vindictive and petty. I am sure in 3 months, there will be a new set of names who just "discovered" BFL. Also, several cases of astroturfing have been uncovered on these very forums in relation to failed projects and out-right scams/theft. So people are naturally going to be leery of an account that was created May 06, 2013, at 11:49:49 AM suddenly entering a conversation in defense of a troubled project.

Personally I think that people who are new to the board are simply unaware of the history of BFL and haven't educated themselves. They might have a BFL order or two and coast along as far as confirmation bias will take them.

No, I'm well aware of their history all the way back to FPGAs. . . hell I even time machined their website back to when it was a nature site. . . .and went through the whole process. What astounds me is how little people understand about the realities of product development and project management. I've never denied the points of fact in this lil' adventure, I've just posed a different meaning to them. I never said they nailed the number out of the gate. I also feel comfortable with where they ended up. I also know it's a rare day when people do hit number on time. History is what happened. Things were proposed and adjusted. It's part of product refinement. Is it late? yes Is it unheard of? No.

You are ignoring one thing. The difference between saying "we are aiming to meet this target" and "we have met this target". BFL made statements in the latter category which could not possibly been true. BFL's claims that they had measured and met their power goals and even bet 1000BTC that they had is open to very few alternate interpretations. Especially when it later came out that their chips had not yet arrived from the foundry when they claimed to have measured them.

BFL made statements about having met milestones that had not actually been met. People would be a lot more tolerant of them of they had just been honest. However, people also might not have pre-ordered so many BFL units.

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 04:03:56 PM

we're gonna hash like the well funded bitches we are.

That's a quality comment - made me laugh

Hehehe I only slept an hour last night

and I tend to just say what I mean

nottm28

hero member

Activity: 574

Merit: 500

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 04:03:56 PM

we're gonna hash like the well funded bitches we are.

That's a quality comment - made me laugh

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: Syke on May 25, 2013, 03:57:01 PM

Quote from: TheSwede75 on May 25, 2013, 03:21:02 PM

There is no 'breach of contract', any business can perfectly legally refuse you service or delivery and choose to refund your money. How do you not understand this? Hell, a gas station can refuse you to buy a pack of gum if they feel like it. Nothing illegal about that unless they refuse you based on race, gender or sexual orientation.

"Refusing" a purchase is very different than accepting payment, failing to deliver the goods, raising the prices, and forcing a refund on a customer. While it may not be literally illegal, it is scammy.

Actually Swede is right, you need to learn a little about business. I think half of this problem is because you niche grass roots people were previously the only peeps running around Bitconia and now business people are coming in. None of this is unfamiliar to anybody who has been involved in business negotiations and processes for any significant amount of time. BFL doesn't scare us, because we know the pattern, we've seen it dozens of times. We even understand how to mitigate it. It happens, it's not unusual and we're comfortable with it. So grab your foil hats people, we're here and we aren't scared of it. We will not bow to your bloated FUD and we're gonna hash like the well funded bitches we are.

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: TheSwede75 on May 25, 2013, 03:21:02 PM

There is no 'breach of contract', any business can perfectly legally refuse you service or delivery and choose to refund your money. How do you not understand this? Hell, a gas station can refuse you to buy a pack of gum if they feel like it. Nothing illegal about that unless they refuse you based on race, gender or sexual orientation.

"Refusing" a purchase is very different than accepting payment, failing to deliver the goods, raising the prices, and forcing a refund on a customer. While it may not be literally illegal, it is scammy.

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: nottm28 on May 25, 2013, 03:32:32 PM

Over the past 11 months there has been a steady stream of low post count people who appear, defend BFL for a while and then disappear. First they defended BFL's power claims even though they violated the laws of physics. Then they defended the shipping dates but those fell one by one, their defenders vanished into the night. Some defended BFL's disdain for their customer base, others encouraged Josh to be vindictive and petty. I am sure in 3 months, there will be a new set of names who just "discovered" BFL. Also, several cases of astroturfing have been uncovered on these very forums in relation to failed projects and out-right scams/theft. So people are naturally going to be leery of an account that was created May 06, 2013, at 11:49:49 AM suddenly entering a conversation in defense of a troubled project.

Personally I think that people who are new to the board are simply unaware of the history of BFL and haven't educated themselves. They might have a BFL order or two and coast along as far as confirmation bias will take them.

Well that is a decent argument I will give you some credit for these points. My BFL order was mid March so I haven't had the pain some people have had. I still think most of the BFL slaters have agendas of their own however and it's not simply their altruistic natures that makes them want to 'educate' us fools.

The ones who shout the loudest have avalon asics and they really, really, really want BFL to fail - to the point they can taste it. More asics = less coins for them. I fear the need for you 'old timers' to want to educate us noobs is less altruism and more greed.

Ditto this. Circle jerking FUD until you accumulate enough circular links to cite it like it's wikipedia does not constitute a "case".

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 03:09:23 PM

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

I just love seeing these brand new accounts coming to BFL's defense after missing 7+ months of deadlines. Quite entertianing. Thanks Josh.

+1

I find it difficult to believe there are this many people with their heads in the sand. Newbie accounts spring up everyday with nothing but carefully constructed apologies and excuses in hand for BFL's non-performance and outright deceptions.

Translation: I can't believe there are this many people who don't believe what I believe and are willing to voice opinions about it. It can't be possible. They must all be the same person

Over the past 11 months there has been a steady stream of low post count people who appear, defend BFL for a while and then disappear. First they defended BFL's power claims even though they violated the laws of physics. Then they defended the shipping dates but those fell one by one, their defenders vanished into the night. Some defended BFL's disdain for their customer base, others encouraged Josh to be vindictive and petty. I am sure in 3 months, there will be a new set of names who just "discovered" BFL. Also, several cases of astroturfing have been uncovered on these very forums in relation to failed projects and out-right scams/theft. So people are naturally going to be leery of an account that was created May 06, 2013, at 11:49:49 AM suddenly entering a conversation in defense of a troubled project.

Personally I think that people who are new to the board are simply unaware of the history of BFL and haven't educated themselves. They might have a BFL order or two and coast along as far as confirmation bias will take them.

No, I'm well aware of their history all the way back to FPGAs. . . hell I even time machined their website back to when it was a nature site. . . .and went through the whole process. What astounds me is how little people understand about the realities of product development and project management. I've never denied the points of fact in this lil' adventure, I've just posed a different meaning to them. I never said they nailed the number out of the gate. I also feel comfortable with where they ended up. I also know it's a rare day when people do hit number on time. History is what happened. Things were proposed and adjusted. It's part of product refinement. Is it late? yes Is it unheard of? No.

nottm28

hero member

Activity: 574

Merit: 500

Quote from: Xian01 on May 24, 2013, 10:33:03 PM

Over the past 11 months there has been a steady stream of low post count people who appear, defend BFL for a while and then disappear. First they defended BFL's power claims even though they violated the laws of physics. Then they defended the shipping dates but those fell one by one, their defenders vanished into the night. Some defended BFL's disdain for their customer base, others encouraged Josh to be vindictive and petty. I am sure in 3 months, there will be a new set of names who just "discovered" BFL. Also, several cases of astroturfing have been uncovered on these very forums in relation to failed projects and out-right scams/theft. So people are naturally going to be leery of an account that was created May 06, 2013, at 11:49:49 AM suddenly entering a conversation in defense of a troubled project.

Personally I think that people who are new to the board are simply unaware of the history of BFL and haven't educated themselves. They might have a BFL order or two and coast along as far as confirmation bias will take them.

Well that is a decent argument I will give you some credit for these points. My BFL order was mid March so I haven't had the pain some people have had. I still think most of the BFL slaters have agendas of their own however and it's not simply their altruistic natures that makes them want to 'educate' us fools.

The ones who shout the loudest have avalon asics and they really, really, really want BFL to fail - to the point they can taste it. More asics = less coins for them. I fear the need for you 'old timers' to want to educate us noobs is less altruism and more greed.

int03h

full member

Activity: 532

Merit: 104

Quote from: miter_myles on May 24, 2013, 10:29:57 PM

Appears this Ivan character loves to slurp some Josh dong:

Code:

[10:29 PM] BFL_Josh : I don't know off the top of my head.
[10:29 PM] Ivan Frimmel : have you got all the show cooties off ? :) takes days to wash those off your clothes :)

Very unfortunate. I thought Ivan was smarter than that. Sycophantry is serious business to some.

I looked up Sycophantry and I found this thread... am I in the wrong place?

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 03:09:23 PM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 25, 2013, 03:06:34 PM

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

I just love seeing these brand new accounts coming to BFL's defense after missing 7+ months of deadlines. Quite entertianing. Thanks Josh.

+1

I find it difficult to believe there are this many people with their heads in the sand. Newbie accounts spring up everyday with nothing but carefully constructed apologies and excuses in hand for BFL's non-performance and outright deceptions.

Translation: I can't believe there are this many people who don't believe what I believe and are willing to voice opinions about it. It can't be possible. They must all be the same person

Over the past 11 months there has been a steady stream of low post count people who appear, defend BFL for a while and then disappear. First they defended BFL's power claims even though they violated the laws of physics. Then they defended the shipping dates but those fell one by one, their defenders vanished into the night. Some defended BFL's disdain for their customer base, others encouraged Josh to be vindictive and petty. I am sure in 3 months, there will be a new set of names who just "discovered" BFL. Also, several cases of astroturfing have been uncovered on these very forums in relation to failed projects and out-right scams/theft. So people are naturally going to be leery of an account that was created May 06, 2013, at 11:49:49 AM suddenly entering a conversation in defense of a troubled project.

Personally I think that people who are new to the board are simply unaware of the history of BFL and haven't educated themselves. They might have a BFL order or two and coast along as far as confirmation bias will take them.

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

Quote from: k9quaint on May 25, 2013, 01:25:54 PM

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 01:15:58 PM

That's another way of assessing it

I'm just saying from a risk management perspective you have to assess it (independent of belief or emotion) decide what your truth is and accept responsibility for it

Edit: and never risk what you can't lose

Of course all of BFL's customers should have been aware of the risks involved and treated it like the purchase of a lottery ticket.

I was pointing out that BFL probably violated any number of consumer protection laws. For instance, regarding Virginia:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+59.1-200

§ 59.1-200. Prohibited practices.
A. The following fraudulent acts or practices committed by a supplier in connection with a consumer transaction are hereby declared unlawful:
5. Misrepresenting that goods or services have certain quantities, characteristics, ingredients, uses, or benefits;

Most states have similar laws on the books.

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

You have to get a jury to believe that BFL knew what they said was untrue when they said it. It is not as hard as you think. Especially give some of the whoppers told. Moreover, subjecting BFL to scrutiny via subpoena and deposition would be tons of fun.

yes reasonable doubt is easy to beat. . . ask OJ he definitely knows how extremely hard it is to introduce reasonable doubt . . . (Not talking about BFL on this, just the law) . . also I believe that law requires a good be received by the customer that doesn't live up to an advertisement.

TheSwede75

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: darkmule on May 25, 2013, 03:18:29 PM

The fact is, BFL accepted money and by so doing contracted to deliver a product. They're still in breach of contract if they involuntarily "refund" you because they don't like the fact that you're unhappy with their illegal actions. The only reason they probably won't get sued is their suckers are weaklings and fools who would never have the balls to do anything.

There is no 'breach of contract', any business can perfectly legally refuse you service or delivery and choose to refund your money. How do you not understand this? Hell, a gas station can refuse you to buy a pack of gum if they feel like it. Nothing illegal about that unless they refuse you based on race, gender or sexual orientation.

TheSwede75

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: Bitcoinorama on May 16, 2013, 04:51:57 PM

Quote from: Xian01 on May 16, 2013, 04:43:47 PM

Quote from: Bitcoinorama on May 16, 2013, 04:40:57 PM

Erm, genuinely what proof does anyone have that they are specifically singling him out for abuse?

From: Butterfly Labs <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Orders to refund Date: May 16, 2013 3:30:16 PM CDT Hello Christian, After reviewing your account, we have decided to end our business relationship with you. At this time, we are severing all business ties with you and will be refunding your money. This decision was based on a number of different factors and is final. Sincerely, Butterfly Labs, INC

F**k me, they can't actually do that when they entered an agreement to deliver once the sale completed. His 'frustration' stems from their inability to deliver despite many broken promises.

The error is entirely on their part. Has Christian openly stated anything libellous in public forums?

You do of course realize that ANY company has the right to end ANY business relationship with a customer for ANY reason. OP spent, and is still spending a massive amount of effort and time talking shit about a company he had a customer relationship with, and they refunded his money and ended the relationship. What about this is hard to understand?

darkmule

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1005

The fact is, BFL accepted money and by so doing contracted to deliver a product. They're still in breach of contract if they involuntarily "refund" you because they don't like the fact that you're unhappy with their illegal actions. The only reason they probably won't get sued is their suckers are weaklings and fools who would never have the balls to do anything.

Endlessa

sr. member

Activity: 335

Merit: 250

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

I just love seeing these brand new accounts coming to BFL's defense after missing 7+ months of deadlines. Quite entertianing. Thanks Josh.

+1

I find it difficult to believe there are this many people with their heads in the sand. Newbie accounts spring up everyday with nothing but carefully constructed apologies and excuses in hand for BFL's non-performance and outright deceptions.

Translation: I can't believe there are this many people who don't believe what I believe and are willing to voice opinions about it. It can't be possible. They must all be the same person

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

Quote from: k9quaint on May 25, 2013, 01:25:54 PM

Quote from: Endlessa on May 25, 2013, 01:15:58 PM

That's another way of assessing it

I'm just saying from a risk management perspective you have to assess it (independent of belief or emotion) decide what your truth is and accept responsibility for it

Edit: and never risk what you can't lose

Of course all of BFL's customers should have been aware of the risks involved and treated it like the purchase of a lottery ticket.

I was pointing out that BFL probably violated any number of consumer protection laws. For instance, regarding Virginia:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+59.1-200

§ 59.1-200. Prohibited practices.
A. The following fraudulent acts or practices committed by a supplier in connection with a consumer transaction are hereby declared unlawful:
5. Misrepresenting that goods or services have certain quantities, characteristics, ingredients, uses, or benefits;

Most states have similar laws on the books.

I understand and have read that law. But for that to stick you have to prove intent. ...ask any lawyer, it sounds simple, but it's not

You have to get a jury to believe that BFL knew what they said was untrue when they said it. It is not as hard as you think. Especially give some of the whoppers told. Moreover, subjecting BFL to scrutiny via subpoena and deposition would be tons of fun.

creativex

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250