Pages:
Author

Topic: Diablo Mining Company - page 25. (Read 96435 times)

hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 1009
September 13, 2012, 06:40:31 PM
So... what happens if this motion passes?

According to the contract, nothing at all, i would guess.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 513
GLBSE Support [email protected]
September 13, 2012, 06:40:13 PM
So... what happens if this motion passes?

Obviously, if it doesn't pass Diablo will be given full control back to his account.

In the event it passes the asset will be removed from Diablos account completely, and he will get his personal account back. We will then attempt to find an alternative....director for the DMC asset.

How do we decide who is to do that I don't know, suggestions welcome.

If we can't find anyone to take over as director, then DMC will be wound down and all it's assets liquidated either for bitcoin or the assets divided as best as possible and given to shareholders as fairly as possible.
sr. member
Activity: 800
Merit: 250
September 13, 2012, 06:35:01 PM
So... what happens if this motion passes?
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 513
GLBSE Support [email protected]
September 13, 2012, 06:33:58 PM
The CSV for my assets, and my company's assets are separate. I would assume that Diablo's are the same.

Thats true but it still can't be released, for the same reason that a companies internal books and accounts can't just be released to the public. There is also the issue of data protection which is something I'm very concerned about. Diablo doesn't want to release the records, I can't.

However, this is what auditors are for, the can look at the records and say whether they are legit or not.

I'm thinking that one person does the profit and loss, writes the report, and the second auditor reviews both, compares to account information, and accepts or rejects both the report and the profit & loss summary.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
September 13, 2012, 06:27:13 PM
The CSV for my assets, and my company's assets are separate. I would assume that Diablo's are the same.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 513
GLBSE Support [email protected]
September 13, 2012, 06:25:33 PM
Sorry about the motion mess up earlier guys, I'm tired, it's late, I wasn't paying attention.

Anyway here is the link to the motion, as I said it's 5 days before it closes so you can vote and then change your vote anytime before it's closed.

https://glbse.com/vote/view/127

Regarding the auditing, yes it's a good idea to get two people to sign off on it and the report (or maybe do 2 reports and compare). For those interested in doing so the task won't pay a huge amount (a couple of bitcoin) but it will be a great opportunity for us (GLBSE and the whole community) to try this out and set a precedent on how to handle these things.

Please PM me if you're interested.

Nefario.

hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 1009
September 13, 2012, 06:20:27 PM

Read the next line too.  "In the event of liquidation, 100% of the revenue from sales of the assets and 100% of the growth fund, minus any expenses incurred from the operation or liquidation of the company will be paid to shareholders."


Yeah, but that only applies in case of liquidation, which Diablo obviously has no intention of doing.
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
September 13, 2012, 06:10:14 PM
Having a look over the DMC contract and this is interesting.

Looks like you shareholders are pretty much fucked.

First, there's this

Quote
Percent of majority   
to change contract:   66
for general motion:   66
to issue shares:   0

Seems Diablo can pump out shares pretty much as he wants.

There is a difference between issuing shares and giving them (and thus early investor equity) away for free to who knows who. The latter smells like fraud to me. I have to agree that the contract and perpetual IPO plan is a giant clusterfuck and shouldnt have been allowed.

Also, I believe the zero is a result of a GLSBE bug, I remember reading that Diablo never planned on issuing extra shares.

Quote
Then there's this

Quote
Each share represents 0% of the ownership in the company assets.

You ain't got nothin.

Read the next line too.  "In the event of liquidation, 100% of the revenue from sales of the assets and 100% of the growth fund, minus any expenses incurred from the operation or liquidation of the company will be paid to shareholders."

Quote
And last but not least

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.


Yeah that could become interesting and cause a mexican standoff between Nefario and Diablo. However, if nothing else, Diablo's constant misleading, flatout lies and refusal to disclose should earn him a scammer tag. Just look at the title of this thread. 140GH?
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
September 13, 2012, 05:41:11 PM

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.

This now invalid, because it seems that DiabloD3 has breached the contract several times.

How have I breached the contract? Just saying "because I said so" or "because nefario said so" doesn't make it true.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
September 13, 2012, 05:32:00 PM
I object to a puppet account uninspiringly named puppet who has less than 100 posts and is not even a month old and frequently trolls in threads elsewhere on the forum.

I dont care if you object to that. My postcount is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that you accepted 1000's of other people's coins, including some of mine, you managed to make 95% of our value vanish, you breached our contract and you refuse to release the records that would show exactly what happened.

How did I breach the contract?

Also, I refuse to release the records because I do not have permission from every person I've traded with to release said information. Just because they traded with me does not mean their privacy should be violated because nefario wants to exceed his authority.
hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 1009
September 13, 2012, 05:28:36 PM
Having a look over the DMC contract and this is interesting.

Looks like you shareholders are pretty much fucked.

First, there's this

Quote
Percent of majority   
to change contract:   66
for general motion:   66
to issue shares:   0

Seems Diablo can pump out shares pretty much as he wants.

Then there's this

Quote
Each share represents 0% of the ownership in the company assets.

You ain't got nothin.

And last but not least

Quote
Any motions raised by shareholders will be considered non-binding advisory votes.

He can do as he pleases.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
September 13, 2012, 05:14:22 PM
Hm... im just wondering how this stock thing works.

I mean normally someone builds a stock out of his company. The company has a value of $5Billion so he is selling 5Billion shares with the value of 1$ each. Because he wants to hold the company and wants to have the right to rule it he keeps 51% of the shares. The other 49% are sold.

At the end the company is nearly half owned by the shareholders. The other half is at the businessowner.

Each share has a value that is directly attached to the value of a company.

So now... diablo had no company at all. He created 1million shares. Each supposed to have a value of 1BTC. So he claimed in fact the company has a value of 1million BTC so $11Million.

But that doesnt make sense at all because the advertised 1mio btc never will be reached so the value of the company is way way lower in fact. When no more shares would have been sold and the collected btc would have been invested correctly then it simply would have been a smaller business. Giving dividends to the shareholders at the rate possible.

But does that mean that diablo owns 1mio-20909 = 979091shares? Of course not because this would mean he would be a millionaire instantly after ipo. And because of that he cant sell more shares below the ipo-price. If he had bought the shares before from his own money for one BTC then ok, then this would be his thing. But it wasnt.

So usagi... i dont get why you think it was completely fine. Though i can understand the need for making money and making your loss with DMC less hard, it was blackhat what you did. And it looks to me like you arent honest with yourself. Diablo didnt own these shares. He created money from nothing and he sold this nothing to you. Unfortunately at the same time he devalued all the other shares that were sold before for 1BTC because now there was a big part of the company owned for nearly nothing spent. And the argument that the rates were already down doesnt count because diablo wasnt a millionaire from the start. It all was the shareholders money. When diablo would have sold his own bought shares ok, but he created the value out of thin air. Hurting the value of each share that was sold.
Only saying... if you think that was completely whitehat than ok...

@nefario

What do you think... cant you hardcode the price for the initial shares? So that this doesnt happen again? On the other hand... it looks like diablo only moved the shares around and you cant check what he got for. But something must be done here i think. At the moment someone can create 1mio shares and press out as much money as possible. Giving away shares that didnt had a value from the start and he can go down with the price claiming it will be a discount while in fact it is ripping off other shareholders.
Or is there another solution? Maybe something like "IPO has to end after a month. The shares not sold are crashed."
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
September 13, 2012, 05:06:06 PM
I object to a puppet account uninspiringly named puppet who has less than 100 posts and is not even a month old and frequently trolls in threads elsewhere on the forum.

I dont care if you object to that. My postcount is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that you accepted 1000's of other people's coins, including some of mine, you managed to make 95% of our value vanish, you breached our contract and you refuse to release the records that would show exactly what happened.
sr. member
Activity: 800
Merit: 250
September 13, 2012, 04:05:22 PM
I cannot simply release the CSV for any account without the account owners permission.

There is a motion now up available for voting, it has 5 days to vote on
https://glbse.com/vote/view/126

IF you have DMC shares please vote.

Also, I will need someone to audit the CSV and account to work out a basic profit and loss(balance sheet is easy), and a simple report. There will be a couple of bitcoin for the completion of this task(paid out of GLBSE's pocket).

Nefario.

DI.BFLSC.SUCCEED != DMC.

I see no motions for DMC right now.

Let us know when you fix this.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
September 13, 2012, 03:05:15 PM
I cannot simply release the CSV for any account without the account owners permission.

There is a motion now up available for voting, it has 5 days to vote on
https://glbse.com/vote/view/126

IF you have DMC shares please vote.

Also, I will need someone to audit the CSV and account to work out a basic profit and loss(balance sheet is easy), and a simple report. There will be a couple of bitcoin for the completion of this task(paid out of GLBSE's pocket).

Nefario.



Wrong asset and 0% to pass means already passed.
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
September 13, 2012, 02:53:16 PM
I cannot simply release the CSV for any account without the account owners permission.

There is a motion now up available for voting, it has 5 days to vote on
https://glbse.com/vote/view/126

IF you have DMC shares please vote.

Also, I will need someone to audit the CSV and account to work out a basic profit and loss(balance sheet is easy), and a simple report. There will be a couple of bitcoin for the completion of this task(paid out of GLBSE's pocket).

Nefario.

Its linked to the wrong asset. DI.BFLSC.SUCCEED instead of DMC
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
September 13, 2012, 02:52:13 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?

Shareholder that you virtually gave shares to  from the unsold pool for like 0.01BTC, or shareholder that actually purchased your shares?
Regardless, just answer the question: do you object to the records being published or not? If you have nothing to hide, why would you?

I object to nefario trying to destroy DMC based on rumors and without shareholder approval.

So you object to shareholders finding out what you did exactly with their money?

I object to a puppet account uninspiringly named puppet who has less than 100 posts and is not even a month old and frequently trolls in threads elsewhere on the forum.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 513
GLBSE Support [email protected]
September 13, 2012, 02:49:43 PM
I cannot simply release the CSV for any account without the account owners permission.

There is a motion now up available for voting, it has 5 days to vote on
https://glbse.com/vote/view/126

IF you have DMC shares please vote.

Also, I will need someone to audit the CSV and account to work out a basic profit and loss(balance sheet is easy), and a simple report. There will be a couple of bitcoin for the completion of this task(paid out of GLBSE's pocket).

Nefario.
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
September 13, 2012, 02:47:24 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?

Shareholder that you virtually gave shares to  from the unsold pool for like 0.01BTC, or shareholder that actually purchased your shares?
Regardless, just answer the question: do you object to the records being published or not? If you have nothing to hide, why would you?

I object to nefario trying to destroy DMC based on rumors and without shareholder approval.

So you object to shareholders finding out what you did exactly with their money?
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
September 13, 2012, 02:41:09 PM
BTW, I find it somewhat strange that an embattled CEO would even need to give permission for records to be released to the shareholders who paid for this trainwreck. At most a shareholder motion would have to be sufficient IMO.

Several shareholders have already asked for the motion to keep me to be put up now, nefario refuses to do this. Why expect nefario to do anything else?

Shareholder that you virtually gave shares to  from the unsold pool for like 0.01BTC, or shareholder that actually purchased your shares?
Regardless, just answer the question: do you object to the records being published or not? If you have nothing to hide, why would you?

I object to nefario trying to destroy DMC based on rumors and without shareholder approval.
Pages:
Jump to: