Topic: GLBSE Payment Claims (Announce your payment here) - page 13. (Read 44582 times)

Has anyone not thought that most of those payment addresses that received the "double payment" is Nefario's own addresses?

I have had a teller give me some extra money before.  The reason why I give it back is because the till count will be off and that teller would have to makeup the extra money the teller gave out.

I don't see how this is not the same for Nefario.  He can go forward.  If he does not have any bitcoins left, he can start to release the assets without any problem to asset issuers and claim codes to users.  He can also be contacting all those he sent double payment and ask to receive the funds back, for those that don't he can make up the difference with his money, just like they do in the real world.

Eh, yeah, completly missed it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Deprived, theymos, deeplink, I understand those points, but Nefario has already lost his reputation and I see no reason he would accept any such blackmailing since it's not his funds. Although as I said, Deprived, I perfectly agree that request to return funds should be communicated properly and people can and should request an official request from Nefario, along with an account statement showing your final balance and assets.

The issue in holding those funds for not trusting Nefario (even if there's no doubt good reasons to not do so) is that it belongs to other issuers. Holding the funds as escrow to force Nefario to release any data makes you appoints yourself as arbitrator and fund holder. This forces whoever those funds belong to to trust those refusing to send the fund back with their money over trusting Nefario, something they never consented to.

If I understand correctly deeplink, you want them to pay for unreturned funds from their own pocket  and release info before sending them the BTC which would end up reimbursing what they paid from their own pocket? You're free to do that if you want. It does seem like their funds are tight, but as many already/are planning to return funds, I'm sure they can come up with a few 1000s USD for the remaining. Albeit I don't agree with people appointing themselves as escrow in the name of others, especially since they can't give or deny consent for this.

This overpayment doesn't give Nefario a good excuse to keep asset info for most users. Maybe he could keep it for those people who were over-paid, but not for everyone.

This is all speculation. Likely, but speculation. You will never get everyone to return their double payments, so Nefario will always have a reason to point to that and say it is not his fault he is stalling. Instead it could be more productive if customers made a united stand and responded that this mess has to be fixed first. Customers are not responsible for this fuck-up. Also see the post above your post.

Its ok not to trust nefario but what you are saying will actually lead to the point were nefario wont give out any more payment nor the assetinfo. And you know that he wont give it out. So just in case nefario made this double payment on purpose to not have to give out the assetinfo you quite perfectly play his game.
And till now nefario showed that he wants to pay back. As far as i read there are paid back not small amounts already. Even though only getting 90% of the btc back... the assetinfo is worth more for the assetowners. Its worth nothing to nefario.

You can point to other people and say they are the reason why you have no responsibility for your failures. But that is not how I tick. I have hundreds of customers myself and if I make a mistake I always fix it. Even if it costs me money. Customers are never responsible for my mistakes. And I expect the same from everybody else. It is about taking responsibility. Morality will come second. I am sure most people are still honest here and if they feel you deserve it, they will return what is not rightfully theirs. But only after the people responsible for this mess have cleaned it up as good as they can.

Those docs are worth anywhere from $50 to $500 or more depending on credit, and they will use them to falsify credit card applications and possibly get the person whos ID they stole arrested if it is not seen as ID theft.

Still haven't received a mail nor any coins. Anything I can do at this moment? Or should I just wait, like I've been doing for an eternity for my Bitcoinica funds? =/

This post bothers me. (don't want to derail or post OT, so will keep what I want to relay in the content of N, but applies to others who...)

I've seen the mega thread about AML as it relates to Mt Gox, reading most of the posts, albeit not retraining a lot of the info, but feel I got the gist, but not until now realized a possible deeper motive by those who request AML docs under the guise that they're entitled/obligated to request said documents.

A couple questions come to mind:

• Is what Nefario did legal? (collecting AML docs as a UFI)
• What are said docs worth on the BM?
• How could this private information in the wrong hands affect the future of those who supplied said docs?
• What other entities in the Bitcoin world collected said docs under illegal pretense, and are no longer around (include those still active)?

Again, I hope my post here doesn't derail this thread. If the subject matter is important, somebody please start another thread to address these very important concerns.

Thanks.

~Bruno K~

wow

If you know that you received extra money, I think you have a moral responsibility to try and return it (maybe minus a few percent).

However, in this case:
- You can't return it to the rightful owners directly.
- Nefario is obviously very incompetent and untrustworthy, so it would be reasonable to think that returning the money to him would not get the money to the rightful owners.
- Nefario is holding hostage your assets and the BTC of most users, so I think you would be morally justified in refusing to return the money until those things are released.

So I'm certainly not going to give recipients of the extra money scammer tags at least until Nefario releases most of the BTC and asset info.

I am still trying to figure out how you run the payment script twice, I think theymos just wants those people to stand out, since his point isn't really getting across to Nefario.

I don't think Nefario sent double payment by mistake.
He deliberately sent double payment to cause problems.

He got scammer tag for not giving back bitcoins.
& now those who gave scammer tag, must give scammer tags to those who don't payback also.

The issue of returning extra coins sent in error isn't as black and white as either side seems to think.

The general principle (in the UK) is that if you know they aren't yours then you have to return them.  Where the problem arises here is that, so far, nefario hasn't released the information necessary for people to establish how many coins they were actually supposed to be sent.  Once he's provided .csv files of transaction histories then people can verify how much they should have received and return the extra.  Right now he hasn't even given a good explanation of why GLBSE had to close down in a rush - let alone given the information necessary for people to verify what funds they were due.

His primary (original) reason for shutting down was AML.  An entirely credible reasons - but undermined by his subsequent behaviour.  He initially insisted that his legal advice was that he had to obtain ID info for everyone - then retreated very quickly from that position without any explanation.  Was his original legal advice wrong?  Was he just making up that legal advice?  Who knows.

It is absolutely 100% certain that he misled or lied to his fellow shareholders in their irc discussion in respect of his legal advice.  There is NO WAY that a single solicitor could represent both GLBSE (collectively) and nefario (individually) when (as was made perfectly plain in the irc log) his personal objectives were definitely not fully aligned with those of all his fellow shareholders/officers (the officers is the key part).  There's also NO WAY a solicitor could give advice to the company as a whole whilst telling nefario he couldn't tell his fellow officers about it - if the information was only relevant to nefario then his PERSONAL solicitor should be dealing with it.  It's also standard practice in the UK that when advised by a solicitor on a significant business issue, you are then sent a written summary of their advice.  This should have been provided to (at least) the other officers, if not to all shareholders (there's a difference between passive shareholders and actual officers who participate in running the business).

I can understand nefario maybe not understanding what a conflict of interest is.  But I'd be shocked if a solicitor didn't - they tend to try desperately to avoid such conflicts as it leaves them open to liability and complaints of malpractice.  I've had a solicitor refuse to advise me on an issue that arose whilst I was working under instructions from them (and a barrister I was working with on the same matter also refused to give advice) even though the actual solution to the issue that had arisen (which was arrived at after taking independent legal advice) was fairly simple and not detrimental to any of us.  I can only surmise that nefario either consulted on an individual basis and/or played down the involvement of theymos etc such that the solicitor concluded they had no part in actually running GLBSE.

In short, nefario has been less than honest and open so far - both to users of GLBSE and to his own business partners.  There's, thus, no reason anyone should be willing to take his unsupported word on what they're owed.  And how much should be sent back anyway?  Has he even ever stated whether the whole 2nd payment was an error - or was it meant to be sending the last 10%?

Note: I received all (I believe - though can't confirm obviously) my tiny amount of funds back in the first batch of payments.  I haven't received any 2nd payment so have nothing personally to decide whether to return, how much to return or who to return it to.  If I HAD received an overpayment then I'd be putting the 2nd payment in cold storage then waiting until I had the information necessary to determine precisely what I WAS owed AND had either received back control of my assets OR received a good explanation of why they weren't being returned before sending any funds anywhere.

If he's spewing funds around at random then there's no guarantee returning them to him would get them to whoever their rightful owner is anyway.  He could have just disabled trading/transfers and left the site up so we could withdraw and verify our holdings now that he no longer required ID information.  And if there's specific accounts that he can't do that on (e.g. if he has been given specific instructions in respect of asset issuers) then the withdrawal functionality could have been removed from them.

Returned mine as well:

85d3a4cccf14e6b0677bd1e56ade3285c161e71ed03abe90efb4e92282514faf

Nefario, please don't make me regret it.

Double payment coins returned
b7cf57ee4e9a37e3dc3e229323edadcd31969cb92d1d1a72c717d6280b2199bc

I think the double payment should be paid back. In real world its probably true that, if you send someone money through wire and you accidentally changed a number that you dont get your money back but its a different thing for businesses. For example the cases where a bank send one of their customers some million euro and he has to pay it back of course because its not his.

The double payment mostly isnt worth the amount of assets one owned but you can be sure that nef wont run the assetinfo until this money is back. So you can try and blackmail nef with not giving back this money... but why should he care about? Its not his money and he showed that he wants to pay back most of it. So blackmailing him will only lead to the point where he can point with the finger at you guys and say "Look... these are the bad guys" and nothing will move. You know its true. He hasnt shown any responsibility for the damage he caused and feels he is doing everything right. Wants the last months ceo payment and so on even though his shareholders probably suffered higher loss than this because of his actions. I mean would you stop a business this way that afterwards everyone is angry at you? I mean when i would do it i would expect that it will cost me something. And when its only to not leave them all angry.

You try to blackmail him... with money that is not nefarios but belongs to other normal users. He wont care. Why should he? And why should he follow the blackmailing?

You guys deliver him a perfect excuse to not going further.


Or this ^ (deleted some of your lines) is the business trick because nef can be sure that at least some dont pay back. So he could create a perfect excuse why he cant process the sharesinfo.

I don't have a drumstick to stand on in reference to the the non-bold text (first half), but as far as the bolded text is concerned, I think you missed the joke when I penned:


If said event happened at Burger King, the word monarch may have migrated into that sentence. Hopefully, the bolded text now liberates the humor.

The point in relaying the now unfortunate-for-me story was to drive the following home in a very kind way to Dr. Nefario/James:


~Bruno K~

I never wanted to act as an escrow & never asked anyone to follow me in speaking truth or try to be honest.

Scammer tag was given to nefario when he didn't returned money.
Now he starts paying them & sent double payments to some & asked to send back double payed coins.

If the person, who holding others money, even after knowing that, its not his money, will be given sacmmer tag?
coz nefario was given scammer tag for holding others money knowingly.

There is no trick. Nefario holds the records of my asset ownership. He sends that to the issuer and me, I send him back any overpayment. Since your honesty is above reproach, you act as escrow, o.k.? Passes your morality test?