Topic: [CLOSED] GLBSE drama - page 8. (Read 17897 times)

If it was regulated banks and others would lobby hard to impose excessively strict and harsh guidelines upon it the same way they lobby to impose excessively strict and harsh guidelines on paypal that makes it a horrible service to use at times.

Banks don't approve of paypal diluting their market share and being a business competitor.

They wouldn't approve of investment competition by GLBSE & would've channeled a lot of time and energy into ruining it.

Regulation doesn't necessarily mean much considering it typically fails to detect the enrons and madoffs of the world.

Who regulates the regulators. 

Honestly, I do find this a bit "iffy" but I don't think it rises to the level of outright scam.  Whether intentionally or not, theymos created the impression that he was selling his shares in GBLSE for essentially ideological reasons.  While this was true, it wasn't the whole truth.  Some of the shares he was selling belonged to other shareholders and I think that was material information which should have been disclosed as it was a measure of the level of internal disagreement and would likely have influenced people's impression of GBLSE's internal stability.

When Nefario referenced theymos selling his shares because he didn't want his name on official documents, I don't recall him disclosing the fact that it wasn't only theymos who wanted to bail out, either.

this

this

but not proven

Anyone who thinks an unencrypted private message on a forum is actually private or secure in any way almost deserves to have their messages read and used against them.

At this point, it would be more far more economical to find someone worth of a "honest dude" tag around here.


That's reassuring. Insider trading is the minimum that can happen then (if they can read, they could even write).

MtGox *does* the hosting, in other words, they can read your PMs.

MT.Gox pays for hosting, I think.

Possibly OT, but how is Mt. Gox affiliated with forum management?  I was unaware of a connection.

Gotta call it as I see it:

1) I've always appreciated how both Theymos and Mt. Gox have managed this forum.  I've had my complaints, but they could do much much worse and their performance speaks well of them (imo.)

2)  Theymos's attempted sale of the shares (in my limited observation of it) seemed pretty unsightly and even more so as the organization disintegrated not long after.  Scammy?  Very possibly, again in my limited observation.  There was not a snowball's chance in hell that I would have had anything to do with the shares, but if I had bought them I certainly would have felt highly scammed.

Real integrity on the part of any stake-holders would have been to take their lumps and losses on the GLBSE thing.  After all everyone knows that nobody should do anything with Bitcoin that they cannot afford to walk away from, and further, the initial outlay (in money terms) was probably much less then the hoped for sale value.  Also, it should have been clear to any participant that GLBSE (and many Bitcoin related enterprises) are very similar to walking out as far onto the thin ice as possible and probably in part for the sheer thrill of it...which is even more of a reason to take the fall rather than to try to get someone else to do it.

Seems that at least one person entertained some thought of buying the theymos+ stake.  I do believe that consideration of the scammer tag should be taken seriously and discussed seriously, and any participants in the (aborted?) sale should provide their valuable input.  I do hope that consensus (of those honestly weighing things) comes out negative.

MPOE-PR, just out of curiosity.

What do you expect to archive by this?

Do you think this will be successful and theymos gives himself a scammer tag? --> probably not, you aren't that stupid.

Do you think this will attract new customers to your exchange? --> I fail to see how that should work.

Do you just enjoy trolling have the feeling to be the sole fighter for whatever? --> That's what I would put my money on (not literally).

As from you previous reactions it seems I also have to say this:

I'm not trying to offend you, I just don't understand your motivations.

Not since May.

You can either be the Romanian Moot or you can be an adult. You can't be both.

Did you try to purchase part of GLBSE?

I'm lol'ing so hard at this thread.

No offense, MPOE-PR, but I think this thread is really stupid.

What is happening is that the few adults around are shocked and appalled at the horror of this, whereas the general clueless population fails to see the problem through lack of exposure to the real world and its workings.

They were not really his. The simple test to distinguish fraudulent behaviour from innocent behaviour is this: should the situation have been explained correctly rather than as it was explained, would the market position of the proponent have been weaker? In point of fact the silent parties only hid behind theymos because they imagined they will be accruing some benefit from this. So, yes, fraudulent.


No, he merely said that "he does not want to be listed, especially not as treasurer". You might judge this as sufficient, obviously.

Further, the quote you cite does not support your general position. Talk of big businesses buying in and vague privacy concerns does not adequately convey the situation.

As a proud owner of an orange ignore button I protest  

The rest is alright. 

What the hell is going on? Are people actually being brain-washed by this?

Short version of what happened:

Nefario wanted to start risky process of regulating GLBSE.
Theymos and others thought it was a bad idea and wanted out & CLEARLY SPECIFIED that it was entirely because of Nefario's decision to get GLBSE regulated.
Things didn't go so well for Nefario when he tried to get the exchange regulated & GLBSE is now offline.

Things could've went the other way, if GLBSE had managed to get properly regulated then the shares would've skyrocketed in value.

Never suggested it was a popularity contest. What the orange ignore button indicates to me is that a lot of people have said "wow this person is full of shit" and that this should probably be my default reaction. If enough people think you're so full of shit that they never want to hear from you again, your button turns orange and you lose a hell of a lot of clout.

Matter of fact, this is exactly the sort of thing someone like you would do that might result in a "wow this person is full of shit" reaction - demanding that the administrator of a forum give himself a scammer tag (which we all know won't happen) based on crazy allegations that no one has any ability to prove at this point.

The real point is, we haven't heard anything from Nefario or any outside agents who are likely to actually know what's going on with GLBSE. We literally have no proof that anything shady is happening right now though there is certainly enough going on to merit suspicion or worry. Scammer tags are for scammers and let's be honest, we don't even know there's a scam yet. Speak to your suspicions all you want, but only proven scammers deserve the tag and it's way too early to start throwing this around.

How is this false?  Was he not really offering the shares for sale?


He never said the shares were his, he just said he was selling them.  He also disclosed his position as Treasurer right in the OP.   Here it is (in part):


As for the SEC business.  He just offered his opinion that the emails were fake.