Topic: Gigamining / Teramining - page 67. (Read 216459 times)

If anyone has any questions about if they are on the list, please PM me.

Quick questions to clarify the steps, also sent to the lawyer's email address:

I can not find a record of the address used in the claim process as I didn't create a new address specifically for that purpose, but know it was one of several. Will providing several possible addresses invalidate the claim?


As a person and not an entity, I have no Tax ID number. What should I provide in this situation?


Is this "beneficial assignment of the agreement" meaning that it benefits me as a claim holder, or that it was a mutually beneficial arrangement for both parties?

Additional question: are the answers to this meant to be part of the notarized affidavit, or additional forms filed at the same time?

RE: the LLC - if I was in his position I'd do the same thing and protect my livelihood and my personal assets.

Have you guys seen this?
http://mylawyr.com/swf/Miami-Criminal-Defense-Attorneys.flv
*Spokesperson is not a lawyer.

Was this "Virtual Processing Solutions, LLC" mentioned anywhere in the original bond contract? Or is he trying to silently transfer his liabilities to a LLC?

Counteroffer: you can have the females and I keep the males.

*giggles*

lol, good thing he has one then!

Except that he had not any objection to receive boatloads of coins no questions asked from the retards.
Now is a bit late to get it straight, shill.

If there were some form of cryptographic proof of ownership that avenue would probably be pursued. Except you were all idiots and flocked to GLBSE so THERE IS NO PROOF OF OWNERSHIP.

Ya know?

That's the only sensed approach. If he likes to play with lawyers, then let him do it.
I suggest that us small fry investors join to push any sort of criminal and civil charges against this scum.
It was not enough for him to profit like a bandit on the back of his investors. No, he wants all the pie, thank you very much.
I wonder if he's a member of the tribe.

Hello bixcoin,

You have my lawyers information. We will be crafting a response to address everyone's concerns on Monday.

Best,
James

Hey Giga,

now that you have the list, where my email should appear, together with my BC adress, I kindly ask you to confirm this to the registered email and pay my weekly dividends to the BC adress from now on.
I will definetely not jump through your hoops since none of this was originally part of our contract.
If you or your attorney fail to confirm my email adress and send the owing BC back, or contact me in any other way personally to talk through this, until 30th of November, I will have my lawyer taking criminal charges against you.
We are not playing games here. We had a contract, everybody gave you time since obviously you didnt have the information needed to fulfill it. Now that you have the information, its your turn to fulfill your obligations. Not ours to do whatever you think is necessary and was not at all mentioned in the original contract.

Well in theory they could have the documents signed as accepted by the two relevant embassies (US one in their country then their coutry's embassy in the US).  Totally out of luck if even that isn't possible.  But of course all of that should be giga's problem - not yours - as he proposed the agreement, wrote the contract and at no point stipulated any requirement for the information or any restriction on who he'd deal with (or who the bonds were assignable to).  Guess you just have to let him cancel the agreement and return the original amount paid less dividends - which luckily he has the BTC address for (if you're in nefario's list).

Apostille is not universally available; you must live in a country that is a signatory to the relevant treaty on Apostille. Several G-20 countries active in the Bitcoin economy, such as Brazil, Canada and China, are not signatories, along with most of Africa, the Middle East and south-east Asia. Check the map on Wikipedia for details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostille_convention

So I guess shareholders from these countries are just SOL?

Has this internet character "gigavps" provided you with the same detailed information that he is now demanding you to come up with? Has he sent you a letter, translated to your native tong, notarized, stamped and licked and triple stamped once more by every imaginable slimeball in the chain of "pay me to prove, you exist" scam?   
Probably not.

Oh, pardon me, he posted some fkn scum bag lawyers e-mail address? So what? Who is this slimy lawyers representing on this "new" deal?

I guess gigavps tears of joy dried up fast when he realized, that James is sending out the share holders data and he has to let go all those coins he has mined with your money (he bought the equipment with your money and sold you grossly overpriced perpetual bonds - a loan, that is probably never bought back by the issuer, unless it becomes worthless for a period of time. I guess the price is not low enough) 

Looks like the "Plan B" was set in motions and... puff... back to square one.

I am sure the the same scam will be shortly pulled by other issuers, who feel that they have the right to change the rules of the game AFTER they have sold you the ticket

Money brings out the worst in people and this gets proven, in this forum, over and over again.

I second this.
The current terms are not acceptable.
Why should I have to identify myself to you? You don't need this to compare to another list you got and calculate the Bitcoins you owe people.
GLBSE has sent you an email that is linked to the claim. I imagine GLBSE also sent you the Bitcoin address affiliated to the email.

Only those who had knowledge of the GLBSE account credentials where able to enter this information.

Just send the money to that address. That's not rocket science.

You're missing that he doesn't just require notorization - he also requires an apostille.  The apostille is basically confirmation by a central authority that whoever notarised the document is entitled to do so - without it, someone in a different country would have no way to establish whether the apparent notarization was actually legitimate.  To be fair, if he requires notarised documents from non-US residents then they'd HAVE to be apostilled to be of any value.

I'm in the UK.  Cost of notorization can vary - last time I had one done it cost £25 (~$35-$40) but if you don't have regular dealing with a notary it can cost more.  I've never shopped around - as whenever I have a document notarised it's for business, so the cost isn't coming out of my pocket.

The ONLY place which can issue an apostille in the UK is the Legalisation Office of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.  That costs a fixed fee of £30 (~$45) (or did last time I had to get one) - or significantly more if you want the notary to do it on your behalf (no need for that as you can obtain it through the post).

Then add on the cost of travel, recorded delivery (of document to FCO), return postage etc to that and you'll be lucky to see change out of £60-£70 (~$150).  And that's without charging for your own time at all.

No idea at all how easy obtaining an apostille is elsewhere - but the costs of getting a notarised, aspostilled document in the UK are WAY above your estimate of $10 - the FCO fee is non-negotiable even if you had a (notary) friend do the notarisation for free.

Just get a 3 year old kid notarize the document with an "X" and it's fine.

If giga wants to raise any sort of funds in future it will largely depend on how he handles this situation.

Im sure its worth a  lot more to do the right thing.

While I understand giga's position, I find the terms unacceptable.

For any new transactions, I can understand the need to request information for compliance. However, existing funds are effectively being held captive. If choosing to remain a shareholder, it is fair to expect information to be required. If not, the release conditions are excessively invasive and borderline fraudulent. There are two options that I can accept:

• Make a buyout offer on existing shares (including dividends to date) to associated email addresses.
• Wait until a decentralised exchange system is in place, and transfer asset ownership into that without requesting identifying information.

In my view, the legal counsel is being destructively conservative; I would opt to avoid any service taking such actions after the fact. Either honour the cryptographic proof of ownership for assets held prior to GLBSE closing, or accept the stigma of a fraud label.

As an addendum - I had raised this legal concern regarding mining operations domiciled in hostile political environments. Maintaining the entirety of the business within one jurisdiction is tantamount to eventual forfeiture. Mining operators of sufficient size need to geopolitically diversify their operations.

Only in bitcoin do i see a bunch of people go in on mining gear with the ability for people to buy out each others claims turn into such a fricking drama. It is truly pathetic.

Securities, shares, exchanges, lawyers... Pfft. This is all chicken shit.

Take it fricking underground and keep it rolling. Or liquidate the crap and pay people off.
This aint rocket science.