I appreciate your advice Deprived, and I will look into this option.
I have to say the new guidelines from FINCEN makes this whole ordeal even more absurd. To some degree it indicates that there was never any legal pressure on Gigavps, and that all this verification was really not needed in the first place, but rather a way to prevent people like myself claiming what was theirs under the original contract. I will await Gigavps' answer and plan, and decide on a course of action then.
I feel really bad about this whole situation, not because I could not afford to lose these coins, but since I actually recommended Gigamining to some of my friends and coworkers. They have now lost everything they invested. They could of course also afford losing it all, but it still stings a little. I trusted Gigavps with my coins and felt that he was one of the most upstanding members of the bitcoin community.
Can someone explain to me why Gigavps has not been awarded the scammer tag? I know there is a thread on it, but there was never any real or sensible arguments presented as to how he could get away with it all. This is not a troll question, I'm actually just interested in what specific circumstances made it OK for Gigavps to change the contract, and simply keep the coins? Has there been any proof of government intervention, legal pressure or anything like this at all? Does he have friends in "high places"? Who actually decides who gets the scammer tag?
Gigavps, I would still like to thank you for changing your profile picture. There was something really infuriating about that snug smile of yours, knowing you had all of our increasingly valuable coins
Thank you for bringing this up again.
1. I agree with you that Gigavps should DEFINITELY GET THE SCAMMER TAG
2. I also agree that based on the FINCEN info it is clear that we should request our shares back and otherwise sue him.
Gigavps you better fasten your seat belt.
To be fair, I never said I think he should definitely get the scammer tag, although I am inclined to agree with this. I was merely asking for the specific reasons he didn't get it. I am yet to hear one single reasonable and/or relevant argument as to why he should not get the scammer tag (I honestly don't feel the reasons Theymos gave were reasonable). Especially now, in light of the FINCEN guidelines, it is becoming clear to me that this extremely convoluted "claims process" was just a way to pocket my coins and saying "oops, sorry guys my hands are tied!" It's strange how all the other GLBSE listings I had invested in, has had no problems paying back coins or continuing their operations, without a similar claims process.
As I live in Norway, it would be an extremely cumbersome and expensive affair to sue Mr. James Gibson. My 50 shares would of course not be worth the hassle either, and if the end result is me losing my coins, so be it. I will learn from the experience and I will surely be wiser next time.
Like I said earlier, I'm excited to hear this plan he is coming up with. I still have some faint hope that he will actually do the right thing now that FINCEN has cleared a few things up for us. After all, James is human like the rest of us, and I'm sure he knows that it is the actions of a man who makes a scammer or a thief, not some tag on a forum.
