Topic: Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC (LabRatMining) Official Announcement - page 55. (Read 452224 times)

Bait detected , what happens to people accepting new contract when you stop paying Bonus at your sole discretion after few weeks of accepting new contract , game over for suckers who fall for this.

You want to earn trust , how about paying bonus dividends in next week payout to current contract holders.

I get the sense you have pre-mined bonus dividend coins using the new hardware that came in & will be using those coins to payout bonus till at least those coins run out & then people can rely on your sole discretion I guess.

No offense buddy , enjoy the bliss mode , once the trust based bonus doesn't appear for weeks over & no answer from lab_rat , then you will come down to earth , keep smoking the shit u are smoking

Every body is asking you question straight-up in the best english they can (Non-Native english folks) , question are confrontational as situation demands , deal with it here.

Lab_Rat I kindly request you to share with us number of what is exactly mining for you now , how much more will be deployed & what was purchased & what is to come , I dont think holding this information is going to serve you any more , it creates more mis-trust about what you did with investors money , time to open up & speak is now , take time to answer the question which have been posted .... now is the time !


Tip : I think part in new contract which leaves bonus pay to your sole discretion only should be amended in a way that doesn't leave us relying on you solely for Bonus.   Major concern for all bond holders is trust in you is lost , & leaving our returns in form of bonus at your sole discretion is not going to work , you need to change this term to make it better , I dont know how.

From the past few days experience.  There is no way to answer questions on here reasonably as text becomes misconstrued and the individuals here are either looking to pick a fight or have been screwed over by too many people in the BTC community.  If you would like to email me, feel free at [email protected] and if you would like to request a call feel free to do so by the same means.

It appears that the only way to attempt to gain the trust of those who will not listen is to just show people how it's going to be.  Please note that the Bonus will be paid out to all people who have transferred to the New Contract on May 10th and any and all Bonus that has accumulated or will be earned in the future will not be held for any individual.  You will begin receiving the Bonus at that time (if you have already accepted) or the time of your acceptance (if later than May 10th) of the New Contract.

I will be providing a link to the Old Contract exactly as it has existed since the beginning of the company via email, the website, and these forums as well as a transcript of the AMA and a link to the New Contract as soon as they are all prepared.

I totally agree. There needs to be a lawsuit and Lab Rat Mining dissolved, all assets sold and shared out.

Zach is obviously ripping us all off and hoping to cover his fraud with this new contract BS

It is also obvious that asking questions on here gets nowhere

Oh I understand alright...

My choice of word wasn't directed at anybody specifically, it is more of a general feeling that I (and I'm sure a few others) have about people spreading FUD since the beginning of the whole LRM project.
Oh and yeah, I read every since word of the thread since page 1, the day it all started. This might be pertinent background information.

I stated at the beginning of my post that this was my understanding of the situation, and I didn't ask for your input on it, or anyone else's for that matter.
This is the thought process that led me to ask this direct question to LabRat and is required for him to understand the meaning of my question.

I will no longer reply to anyone else about the content of my previous post. Thanks for your understanding.

In what part of your no way legal advice do you oversee the fact that he wants to change our bonds offered to be variable according to the hashrate attained by the company to a fixed number, laughable number too of 300 mhz?

Because if you think its about investing, he bought like 25 with the first ones and achieved 150th with the reinvested BTC, wich its not bad, he just wants to pay for the first 25 and the rest... it will be explained when he feels like it if he ever does it.

An honest person doesnt take this path, hiding under the table.

I'll take the asshole compliment, i don't trust Lab_Rat, and surely wont trust him ever, i've invested in something totally different of what he wants to claim he offered, and im sure all of us understood exactly the same or we wouldn't be here.

Here is my understanding of the situation.

Given that :
1. LabRat has realised that the company is doomed to fail soon with only a 25% reinvestment rate.
2. LabRat has become uneasy about the few people threatening to sue left and right.

The following happened :
3. LabRat needed to change the policy for a bigger reinvestment rate (to avoid the failure of the company).
4. LabRat needed to use a lawyer to craft a new contract which allow for the new reinvestment rate without being at risk of being sued by the few assholes in (2).
5. Everything LabRat has said since then in the new contract and AMA is his lawyer speaking through him, which is obviously going to protect him legally speaking.

I want to say I am from the silent majority/minority (who knows at this point) that have been supporting LabRat in every decision he made before this legal mumbo-jumbo.
LabRat has always been honest with us in his intentions from the beginning (until he lawyered up), even if he never told much detail about what is going on with LRM on a day to day basis.
He always said that he wanted the company to grow and our share to grow with it, and kept this word until now.
The new system allows the company to still be profitable and increase our payout while remaining legally protected.

_________________________________________

My question for LabRat is the following :

Do you intend to keep the same philosophy you always kept until now (for us to profit from the company's growth at your side) or has that changed in any way (since you might have lost respect for the people outlined in (2), for example)? The change could include but is not limited to diluting the shares, preventing us from profiting of the discretionary bonus hashrate.

If your philosophy is still the same, I will be one to go through with the change of contract, since this whole thing has always been trust-based, and I personally think that every decision you took before profited us as investors.

BTW, this question is in no way legal advice and is purely about your personal philosophy/ethics.

I had an inkling how the new contract would work but it turns out I'm dead wrong. It's occurred to me that maybe I should propose my ideas as an alternative Zach can investigate with his lawyer if it wasn't proposed already.

I'm assuming since there will be different contracts "new" and "old" that uniformity of contracts is already out the window. So why not write into contracts for existing owners a provision that will exist only for them and not for any future contract buyers ("newer" contracts)?

Instead of relying on an ethereal discretionary bonus payment why not offer a contingency that states every time new contracts are to be sold that existing contracts have the option to purchase new contracts at discount? Limit it to 1 to 1. So if I currently have 100 contracts I'm entitled first dibs on 100 new contracts for the sum of say 100 satoshis. This would be ongoing for every future offering allowing me to purchase 100 new contracts every offering. Or perhaps my bought contracts would be additive allowing me to purchase 200 discounted contracts on the 2nd offering (assuming I bought 100 + my original 100) progressing to 400 the next offering etc.

The numbers and specifics would have to be balanced to work with LRM's growth trajectory. Regardless of the specifics, such a contact would satisfy a contractual obligation to offer participation to existing owners when company growth occurs at minimal cost.

Or put in a contingency that mandates future share splits when company milestones are reached (either in terms of hash rate or offerings of new contracts).

Neither of these two ideas strike me as impossible to implement nor running astray of law/regulations. Lab Rat, please inform if these ideas have been floated. If there are reasons neither of these can be put into the contract please advise. I think we deserve to know why you haven't been able to express growth as a contractually binding principle in your proposed contracts.

Is this third party someone here who wants to own up to the project?

Any details and/or ETA?


grnbrg.

When is the right time to explain what happened?

ffs you called it an IPO . . . .I know you'll say this and that about it wasn't profit sharing, wtf ever.  we know the reality and playing coy about it isn't helping.

If you don't understand why people feel you are ganking their profits, then perhaps business isn't really your strong suit.

Only way for this to not end badly, imo, is if LRM sucks it up and turns itself into a real corp with real shares.  The very reason corporations exist.  Non-voting shares could be issued.  According to Fincen BTC dividends are legal as a share of profits and distributed to share holders.   Anything less than this allows too many shady situations.  That would put ownership of assets under a single corp entity. allow lrm to maintain control of decisions (obviously important to him).  And legally allow profit sharing. Corps exist for a reason.  That's the avenue I'd pursue with a lawyer, this just feels all hookey.  Not legal advise, just a suggestion inline with my observations.

Only way to avoid SEC is if we DIRECTLY OWN fractional shares of the mine.... not just use of xxx hashpower.

For aircraft for example ...

Thought same, but unfortunatly he seems to think different.

If He was able to do 1 bond 100mh, and triple the number of bonds to give 300mhz, he can just do 1 of 100 to 25 of 100, any logic that allows the first allows the 2nd.