Topic: Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC (LabRatMining) Official Announcement - page 199. (Read 452224 times)

PM it to me, and I'll have a try.  I can't do anything officially with it, but I can at least poke at it.  

Be very careful of extra spaces in the message before you sign it...  I think my problems occurred when I cut and pasted Lab_Rat's message and filled in the blanks.  I left too many blanks, which were included in the signed message, but were disappeared when I pasted it into the mail client...  



grnbrg.

does anyone know what was orderded?   why is this information not provided?

If the share holder accepts it, LabRat could sent the coins to the address.

ive signed a message i think but if i try to verify it in the bitcoin qt it says verification failed

what am i doing wrong ang can labrat confirm anything from the email i sent???

Good idea and good point.

An Idea: If the shares are not claimed then LRM should buy back the shares at market price and put the money aside to be claimed.

But how do you claim the shares if you can't sign with the address on bitfunder? These shares are lost forever anyways. Unverifiable.

I agree with unverified shares stay with the account, but not indefinitely and I also believe that dividends from unverified should get divided up to the verified users until the account is verified.

Yes I believe in you snooze you lose.

EDIT: I know that's probably not the popular view, also I see my address is still showing as Failed for verification so awaiting that to be rechecked.

I want to throw my vote in that unclaimed shares should remain in an account so that they could be claimed later.

Other decisions such as rolling the first 14 days of mining from the new Bitfury gear into new hardware were made by general consensus on the forums.  Maybe if we're vocal it'll get done that way.

I would certainly want for others to fight for my rights if I were in absentia.

Agreed. It was audacious to say unverified bonds would be "absorbed" - a political way of saying "taken without consent of the owner". It's a very bad mark on LRM in my view. Instead, the dividends should be set aside for those people.

Um, no, it would not be fair.

The dividends would need to accumulate and ALL of them paid out when the claim is made. Dividends earned by unclaimed bonds do not belong to LRM nor anyone else; they belong to the bond holder on record. And that bondholder is entitled to all of the accumulated earnings. It isn't rocket science. GigaVPS, upon consultation with his legal representative on GigaMining/TeraMining, came to the same conclusion about unclaimed GigaMining shares which he explains in his own thread.

Resent again...

Guess that would be a fair solution for those that didnt verify.
So others get their dividends untill they verify any time and get dividends as well.

I've resent mine. Waiting on update.

Yes, send the message again.  It's easy, and it does no harm.

This.  ^^

Absorbed bondholders should be able to claim their bonds anytime after the deadline if they can prove ownership of the address.  However, they will have lost the interim dividends since the dividends are not held or rolled over.

I think I added my personal email address (only the bond companies that I own can see it) So, I would assume that he should use that feature and send an email to everyone that put one on bitfunder. I sure would be mad if I came back from either a long vacation or from the hospital only to fine my bonds "absorbed" but I have a feeling if someone came back and proved that they were the owners, LR would make it right.

sent.

"I am retired and have bought 500 LRM bonds as a way to get a no-hassle, steady stream of BTC income while I go on with my life in other endeavors. I like to travel the world now, enjoying my life, and am sometimes away from home for months at a time. Sometimes years. I don't waste my time reading the forums or websites too often; honestly I have higher and more fulfilling priorities in my life.

"Imagine my surprise when I return home for Christmas to find that, due to no fault of my own, Lab_Rat has seen fit to "absorb" my 500 bonds and leave me with nothing. My bonds have been stolen by the issuer, and I have not been compensated. I'm quite sure my lawyer and judiciaries would have a field day with that.

"There is nothing in the contract I entered into with LRM stating that I must be 'verified' or do anything other than pay for my bonds and provide a BTC address. LRM has the entire shareholder list from Bitfunder, in the form of payout addresses and bonds held. Mine among them. He has been paying dividends to that address since the beginning, and there is nothing preventing him from continuing to do so. As long as I hold bonds, he is bound by contract to continue to pay. He cannot arbitrarily decide to change the terms demanding further information from anyone as a condition of continued payments or, worse, forfeiture of bonds.

LRM has a list that says "address 1xyz holds 500 bonds". There is nothing more he needs to know than that, and it is all that I (and LRM) agreed to when entering into our contract at point of sale.

Now, the above story is just that: a story. It isn't true. But the points it makes are relevant to all bondholders here.

If anyone finds their bonds "absorbed", it isn't difficult to see that is tantamount to thievery. If LRM wants to arbitrarily change the contract terms as he seems to be doing, he first needs to make 'reasonable' attempts at contacting people ('reasonable' being the very clear legal definition of the term, not his own arbitrary definition) and provide a 'reasonable' way of people to opt-out if they do not find these new terms acceptable.

The correct action from LRM, for people who cannot be contacted or 'verified', is to opt them out ... and that doesn't mean 'absorb' their bonds; it means buy back their bonds at 'reasonable' market value and send a final payout to their last address on record. Nothing complicated about it. Situations like this are not uncommon, and there is ample precedent. "Absorption" of bonds would not go over well in the courts. Not for LRM, anyway.

The reality is that verification is necessary only for those wishing/needing to change their payout address. For the others, the majority who are fine using their existing payout address, verification is unnecessary.

LRM is taking a 25% 'management fee' from everyone's dividends. He has a lawyer. It is long past time to use him, because what I've been reading in this thread as 'official news' is ridiculous.

Perhaps a minor point, but I'll add it: I am irritated that LRM has charged a fee for his recent dividend payment outside Bitfunder. Due to negligence, or incompetence, or ignorance he used multiple transactions to send out dividends when he could have simply used a single multi-transaction. He screwed up and has taken money from all bondholders instead of eating the fees himself. Without their consent or prior knowledge, for goodness sake. This was especially hurtful to the small bondholders, of which there are many.

He's pulling in BTC hand over fist with his 25% rake and still has to nickel-and-dime the small investor to cover his own mistake? And he doesn't want to own up and say "sorry, I screwed up" and return the funds? I'm not sure what to say to that ... but it is nothing less than shameful.

Sent email with signature again... lets hope this one sticks