Topic: Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC (LabRatMining) Official Announcement - page 92. (Read 452224 times)

To be fair, LR already said that new hashrate will be divided between contract holders one way or another. He just hasn't proposed the method yet.

So right now we are stuck with 300mh contracts + his word.  It's far from ideal but it's not quite time to sue either.  Let's see what the proposed method is.

I'm stuggling to see why the change is necessary and how we will achieve adequate liquidity going forward, but the lawyers must have something in mind...

Focus! May as well ask the magic 8 ball anything.

We are now gaining the impression of a weasel word spewing slimeball with intent to deceive. We need some sort of commitment that says our bonds will be worth more than a flat 300Mh, because seriously if you've had 2-3 months to think about this and THAT is your final word, I don't know why we're giving you the courtesy of even another minute to explain yourself before the shit hits the fan.

I will make an attempt to clarify #4 in one quick sentence but the rest you can read a little more for.  Everyone who has contracts at this point in time is an "early purchaser" of contracts.  The company is still young and people should not be looking at this like it's all going to end in 3-4 months.  I can't count how many times I've stated Bitcoin is not a sprint it's a marathon.  For over 2 years people said that graphics cards were not profitable and in 4-6 months people will stop mining so much, but every time someone said that the price went up and they remained profitable.  Change =/= Death.

No worries.. I was just poking at you for poking at me about reading. I actually had read most of your posts (scanned where it seemed unimportant). But I guess re-reading them helped sort it a bit more - if not for the mere cathartic effect. I will summarize for myself and others to track with me. The blue is my original blue question. The quotes are your responses you gave to other people about either their question or some other topic, but that hit in the vicinity of answering my question - even if wasn't directly answering my question. And these are all of your comments that I gleaned over the past ten pages that seem significantly enough related to my questions. There is a reason I didn't think you answered my questions, and it was because these are only partial answers. So, I'll expound in purple.

1. What is up with the 150TH order?

In one comment you wrote:
"No new hardware is in yet."
I had figured it wasn't in. But wasn't sure. So, that answers that part. But the question is a little deeper. Was the order actually ever placed, and if you were getting any updates.
I was speculating that since Coinseed's orders were so large that it would interfere with LRM orders. Ifso, that would stink.


2. What is the current status of the hardware resources you've been working on? Were any bridges closed or burned?

I found three relevant comments you made to others:
i. "There are certain important connections that are still in place, but there are things changing in the BTC hardware manufacturing community that are not my place to comment on."
Can you at least comment on if buying at prices comparable to what were expected before are at the least still achievable?

ii. "It has been done as an immediate fix, but the business world does not operate on same day basis unfortunately.  I can beg and plead for information today and I'll get answers by the end of the week if I'm lucky."
The second half seemed to be a comment about begging for hardware shipment updates. Is that correct?

iii. "No I can't as they are not my companies and releasing information that is not mine to release would destroy relationships built with manufacturers."
Ok, secret squirrel stuff.

3. Are you committed to LRM being an actual success?

No answer found.
This may have been answered in some effect, but I don't think it is entirely clear. Let me just ask: Do you have a confident (not necessarily certain) outlook for LRM and current investors for the long run?

4. Are you committed to keeping the spirit of the agreement you communicated and sold to everyone?
That spirit means you intend to continue to send out dividends in proportion to the growth of the whole company hash-rate, and maintain the same continual re-investment plan.

You commented in one place to another comment:
"I'm working on doing so and all I have done is provide an immediate fix that does fit into the original contract promises, with the intent to find a way to benefit early contract purchasers as more hardware comes in."
Is it correct for me to interpret this to mean that you do have the intention to do what you can to grow investors dividends with the company in at least the general spirit of the original agreement? In other words, you intend to diligently seek ways to grow investors investments (sounds obvious, but needs to be asked in light of how things have been perceived).

...

Hi Lab Rat.

Can you give us an estimate yet of when new hardware will be arriving?

Cheers

Dave

Bargrpahics has not posted in some time , I hope he is A ok.

If it was 4 I apologize but I believe it covered them.  I recall the Blue writing followed by red writing almost immediately after demanding an answer in the middle of the night. 

Thanks. I have been tracking. It was actually a total of four questions in blue lettering (or did you not read that?). But I'll go back and re-read your comments to double check.

Oh... now i know why HW is always late.  
"Smart" move. "I will do nothing until my lawyers will tell me how to solve this shit"?
Even answer questions about new hardware? What about other questions?
Who is this "many folks"?

U didnt learnt anything since last time u taked fee from dividends? In contract was that will be no fee. U have broken it. And.... u got solution in... what time? In some hours someone posted about sendmany. But u still did taked this fee because ... u dont know what u doing.
And we are again in same situation. U have problem, find some idiotic solution and u have again same problem. We didnt like the way u solve problem.
The problem is in formulation u said about it. I hope/believe this is temporary solution.

 As someone have said before if u would just say:
 "Houston, we have a problem. My lawyers says that by $ paragraph we cannot do "this" and "this". Currently i have no solution to make it painless way, so temporary decision will be that bond hashrate will be fixed at 100MH but bond amount will be tripled so 1 280MH old bond will magically turn into 3 new 100MH bond. This will be applied and stand until better solution will be found by my lawyers(maybe community will help?). About new hardware: Its still didnt arrived. I think that i will issue new bonds when HW will arrive and give it to investors to maintain same procentual part of LRM hashrate for investors."

I think that with this kind of announcement there would not be this negative reaction from community. But u must understand that if you order hardware on investors money and say that they will not get any hashrate from it - they will be very angry.

LabRat
Can you say to us, that we will get same proportional hashrate from hardware was already ordered and your lawyers will find some solution? Because if you want to keep BF order and BFL order by yourself and leave current investors only with 17TH - this not gonna happen and you must understand it.

Orbit please read the last 10 pages, I answered the 3 questions you asked.  I read every page therefore anyone asking questions should be doing the same.

EDIT: also the order of those 3 entities did not signify importance.

I know you were responding to someone else. And on what you wrote here, I agree with what you are driving at. Labrat can only do what he can only do within the law.

However, he could at least answer some hardware questions or express his intentions better. Especially, if his intentions are seeking to honor the spirit of the original agreement. It doesn't have to be expressed in the sense that "this is how the end solution will be", but it can be "this is the KIND of end solution I want to find. And I will fight to find if such a solution is possible". .... That is not an end solution, but it is a commitment to fight or work for a kind of end solution (if it's possible). This would resonate well with people, especially if it's seeking to honor the spirit of the agreement. That really wouldn't be hard to ask. In the meantime, however, people have to read in between the lines and observe his very defensive posturing.

I really don't want to be unfair to Labrat's intentions or misrepresent him. If I ever did, then I was wrong. But the importance of investors questions & concerns should not be so easily dismissed. And I find it ironic that he said he was advised to stop answering questions, when he really didn't answer any questions. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm willing to be corrected on that.

I'd bet there are many many more folks that would be advising you to answer any of the simple questions.

For that matter. How could they advise you of that if you haven't actually answered any of the most obvious questions that have people all tensed up?

BTW: What is a "pheonixed contract"?

The trend in bitcoin isn't that people are suing for everything, the trend is some people are outright scamming and some are very poorly managing other people's investments.

If you wanted to defuse half of the tension in this thread (if not more)... you could just say this:
"Just like the 3 for 1 issue. I will proportionately add more bonds to accounts as the whole company hashrate grows. And if I figure out a a better way, then that will be implemented. But the spirit of the original agreement will be honored as closely as possible." (or something along those lines - just trying to communicate is respectable, imo)

Your priority should be this Zack.
1. Investors
2. You
3. The company

Not:
1. You
2. The company
3. Investors

First, he posted the end solution, this is what unchained this reaction.

Second, if he can do a mine with 25th speed with 59000 contracts, he can have 2 identical.

If he can triple the contracts right now to match speed with number of contracts, he can split them tomorrow for the same reason.

Dont try to tell me how to act, say or behave, he already fucked this proyect and his credibility, no one will put 1 satoshi on him if he continues this path, regardless if the problem is the goverment or his limitations to comunicate or act.

You are both jumping the gun here... and although I am as unhappy as all with the knowledge we have right this second... please refrain from spewing that nearly incomprehensible garbage above until we have all the facts.

Zach can't tell you what the end solution is because legally he MUST NOT until his lawyers have put to rest any chance that THIS pending change might still violate the law.

Hindsight may be 20/20... but assuring that the future of LRM is not spoiled completely by Uncle Sam fining the shit out of the operation because of some obscure wording in a law never meant to be used on a form of ANYTHING like crypto takes time and money... and as it has been said before... this is the BLEEDING edge... things like this must be found and handled as they come up... no one has set a 100% fool proof precedent in such an undertaking so no one should expect this to be a 100% problem free operation.

Shit happens... let it get dealt with. If it does not and folds... you still have the same recourse as you do right now.

Labrat.

Nobody is really trying to dictate how fast your lawyers work. It seems like you are disconnected from what people are reading from you. And in fairness, that could easily be happening the other way around where people are not reading you correctly. But resolving how people read you is more in your control than you seem to know.

You simply need to try to answer critical questions - even if only in your theoretical ideal - and just communicate more. Speak plainly. We are not the enemy!! (unless you view us that way).

But some of what you wrote in the past couple days comes off as raw defensive & legal posturing. And this is a really bad sign - and you may simply not realize it. However, if you were to instead speak as if you were going to do everything to keep the spirit of the agreement going - even if that means liquidating to avoid hurting people - then you will gain much much more respect. People don't sue people they respect.

The forum could be a lot calmer. And you could have more respect from investors. It's your choice.

+1

You're the clear example of someone not an evil nor thief who screwed up all those who trusted in you if you end up changing the terms to the ones you showed, regardless of those who want to sue or beat you with an ugly stick.

Because i don't need to read 1 single page of any law in any country, if you can do contracts as you claim for 100 mh each, and triple them just because it suits you to comply laws, nothing stops you to add more contracts or double/triple/whatever you want and assign them to the contract owners in case of adding new hardware to keep the reward balanced. You dont change the speed, you dont change the reward yourself, the network does on what returns from those 100mh. you can just create 1 trillion contracts unasigned to give to everyone, if you need more, just do the same you did to triple them and create 200 trillions more.

You want another stupid idea, make our contracts for max 1 TH per, and make a very conservative plan that takes ages to complete to get to enough th to give us all the 59k contracts 1 th/each and note that you will pay us in full 1/59000 part of whats mined, that will buy you years, they cant forbide you to plan ahead, they cant prohibit growing, and we allow you to pay accordingly and manage the funds to achieve your goal of 1 teracrap.

Want another? we do 25 th now at 59000 contracts? create another 25th mine with 59000 contracts? or what stops you to make another for 50th and 59000?

More? 25 th at 59000 contracts, when the 50th from BFL arrive, triple again the available contracts, it will be the same crap, 75th for 177k contracts, thats exactly what you did now.

Seriously, that's a lot of solutions, you just took the easy and less problematic and the most expensive for all, someday you gotta admit you're doing things wrong, several, regardless on how cute, nice, decent or even clean, we make mistakes, you did and we pay.

and its gone.

I am taking advice of many folks and stopping answering any questions.  I'll poke my head in at least once a day or two to say "Still here" and that is all.  The next time you receive anything of substance it will be a full report on the subject which will take time to produce.  There are 94 pages of NJ Laws that pertain to this matter, let alone the federal laws.  Contained in this report will be all legal matter as well as a pheonixed contract.  If you don't like it, sue LRM.  But I must warn you, that you will lose, and cost yourself money twice because the money used to fight the legal battles will be that of the company's.  This is the last thing any of us want, but it seems to be a trend in Bitcoin lately to sue over everything.

I'm looking out for my interests, as well as those of the company and all those involved.  To those of you who have known me going on 2 years now, you know I'm not some evil thief.  I'm doing what's necessary and I believe that the end result will be something everyone can live with.

Thank you!!!

To anyone dictating how fast my lawyers will work, that's just not going to happen.  I don't even dictate how fast they work.  Reading hundreds of pages of legal mumbo jumbo takes time.