Topic: MEMBERS OF ETHEREUM TO RETURN ETC TO DAO INVESTORS PETITION - page 5. (Read 8026 times)

Sorry, DAO was a disaster that spread across ETH, now they are trying to save face claiming the fork was a good idea when everyone knows they fucked up big, big time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGGW9ozE-ys

Excellent video to see both sides of the coin, and ETC objectively wins the debate.

If the DAO black hat hacker does not return the ETC to the rightful owners, it will be worthless. So there is no need for the white hats to return.

You misunderestimate lawyers' agility.

All a lawyer needs is some reasoning-by-analogy that's the kernel of a plausible theory and he's ready to go. If the legal beagle gets the idea that the Ethereum ---> forked Ethereum + Ethereum Classic is like a split of a company into two, called a "spinoff," then he has a theory he can work.

1) Show that every holder of Ethereum before the split block received equal amounts of Ethereum-Fork and Ethereum Classic;
2) Show that Ethereum Classic has a copy of The DAO which contains Ethereum Classic, and that draining this version of The Dao does not touch the Ethereum-Fork DAO's holdings in the least, thus demonstrating that the Ethereum Classic in the ETC-DAO is separate from the Ethereum-Fork held by the "real" DAO;
3) Tie (1) and (2) together by showing that token holders in The DAO pre-fork have equal amounts of The DAO tokens for each blockchain;
4) Drag in the analogy relating the one-blockchain-into-two to a corporate spinoff, for which there are lots of precedents to show that all shareholders in Company X are entitled to their aliquot shares in both company X1 and Company X2;
5) Possibly put an insta-expert on the stand to demonstrate that a) the fork reduced the value of the "real" Ethereum and b) there's a negative correlation between the value of Ethereum-fork and Ethereum Classic, which tightens up the Ethereum-as-corporate-property analogy. [This one might well be superfluous, and it is risky because the insta-expert would be subject to cross-examination.]
6) Demonstrate that The DAO is a creature of the Ethereum blockchain, has no life or value outside of it, and demonstrate that The DAO has value with the Ethereum blockchain - and that The DAO-Classic has value in Ethereum Classic.
7) Conclude by adducing standard company-split precedents that all say that a company which splits owes its shareholders aliquot stakes in both new companies - and demonstrate that this analogy is exact with respect to forked Ethereum and Ethereum Classic.

So yeah, I'd say that a lawyer would take his money.


P.S. I'm no legal beagle myself, but I found this out when two mining-exploration companies were amalgamated into one (which became a producing gold mine, by the way) a long time ago. The two companies were called Golden Giant and Golden Sceptre, and they held deposits next to each other that were amalgamated into a new company called Hemlo Gold. As part of the re-org, which started off by merging Giant and Sceptre, each shareholder in each company got stock in three companies: Hemlo Gold, New Golden Giant and New Golden Sceptre. Never mind that the last two went nowhere; each shareholder was still entitled to a piece of all three because otherwise some corporate property from the temporarily-merged Giant-Sceptre company would have been unaccounted for.

The only risk with the above theory comes with the kernel analogizing a cryptocurrency to a corporation. But a capable lawyer could adduce the IRS ruling that cryptocurrency is property, and hope that the judge carries the ball the rest of the way by deciding that the analogy to corporate property is legally sound. It's not a sure thing, but it's a good-enough theory for a lawyer to take his money and sleep soundly at night.

A lesson in how to make friends and influence people.

Your attitude will always get closed doors. Get your money ready. The only way you'll get this ETC is in court. And I'll be supporting the defense all the way.

What i am  going to say to Van-de Sande.

Me - Hi MR Sande - Did you notice you and your 'white hat' hacker team which you curated still owes DAO Investors over 18 million dollars.

Van de  - No it must of slipped my mind

Me - Oh really, Gee, Thats why you and your chronies havn't updated anybody as to what your doing with the stolen DAO ETC.

Van de - Yes, well alot of things slip my mind , especially when you work for Ethereum

Me -  Yes really tough remembering to update people when you work for Ethereum and the ETC & ETH case has been ongoing for the past month.          
        I mean its only a mere 7.2 million ETC-  So will you give back the ETC?

Van de  -- Well no DAO investor has asked for it back untill now

Me - Well look at the petition



PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION

Thanks for your support

They have stolen money! They have no right to stolen money. They should return it to who it rightfully belongs to, otherwise they are criminal thieves.

I signed the petition.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/ethereum-devs-hack-the-hacker-price-skyrockets/

Indications that something was under foot were given yesterday later afternoon when Alex Van de Sande, lead designer at the Ethereum Foundation, twitted that a whitehat attack on the DAO was under way.

After some tense hours, Sande explained in a public post that “a group of very smart people” which, according to Stephan Tual, were composed of “members of eth foundation, devs, security experts, ethcore, slock,” acting as individuals and not as representatives or with any endorsement of their employers, infiltrated “all open split proposals” and secured 7.2 million eth “now held in a child DAO” with the team holding “the private keys of the curator.”

Fabian Vogelsteller, lead Ðapp developer at Ethereum, stated in a public post:

“We know the curator of the Attacker DAO with 3.5M ether, now 7.2 ether are safe in a DAO where we also know the curator. With a temporary Soft Fork all this ethers can be send to a refund contract and the nightmare is over!”
There seems to be little, if any, controversy regarding the soft fork which has already been merged in Parity, one of Ethereum’s clients, and will be merged in Go within a day or two. According to an ethpool vote, miners are almost unanimously in favor, developers are in full consensus, and most users seem to be in favor.

However, the hard-fork, which has been subject to much debate, may be avoided. Sande, who has been against the hard-fork from the beginning, stated that the “[h]ard fork is unnecessary at this point.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These individuals have the responsibility to return ETC back to the DAO holders

SIGN THE PETITION IF YOU AGREE

The reason the white hat hackers transferred funds to their dao was to prevent the attacker from siphoning funds from the DAO. Now that it is all over my opinion on the matter is that the white hackers have the responsibility to return the funds they are holding. If they do not and plan to hold it for their own purposes then they are thieves like how some say the attacker is a thief.

It's called "Muphry’s Law".

Great english

And yes i don;t think that it will go anywhere which is why i created a  petition. Dipstick. As was inscribed on my old cassacius coin - ' Vires in Numeris'.

No, what's "rediculous" is your spelling AND your willy waving without even trying to do the adult thing and talk to the person involved. They are not "holding" your ETC. They have created a child DAO, which is far from being secure from further attacks.

But thanks for clarifying that you're not actually interested in any kind of solution. Happy trolling.

LOL - this actually made me laugh for a minute....
a) its no more criminal than any other currency being the dollar, shekel, franc etc....

b) You don't get it. It isn't my obligation"'to code, implement and support a contract on the whitehat DAO that will allow themselves to withdraw the ETC'". It is the obligation of whoever is holding my rightful ETC by taking it in the first place aka members of the Ethereum team ( who were trusted to return it). If the coders really want some funds to do this for their time, the DAO holders can compensate by giving some ETC from the pool of funds.
c) Yes, i could contact the individual who led the white hat but will it go anywhere??
Before making this thread i came across this only request on the ethereum stack exchange

http://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/7613/ethereum-classic-etc-and-the-dao-holders-will-the-white-hat-hackers-return-t

The question was put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Roland Kofler, eth♦ Aug 1 at 7:02
So no answers there.........

I also don't think that the white hat hackers should be rewarded 18 MILLION dollars for their efforts. That is ludicrous therefore stop making the narrative that they deserve it for trying to rescue the funds, which didn;t work out -  now they deserve to be filthy rich at the expense of the DAO holders. Its rediculous.

Ok so as I gets it, the OP is asking for someone, anyone apart from him, to code, implement and support a contract on the whitehat DAO that will allow themselves to withdraw the ETC criminal coin of whatever someone invested into the DAO ETH chain. Ok dude we is waiting on your skills. Why criticise others when you can't even produce yourself. Fuckin disgusting self entitled idiot. You are worse than a Spoetniktard sockie.

That's why I wanted to know if the "white hats" have expressed any opinion on this. My understanding is that even though the coins are in a child DAO controlled by the "white hats" it would still require quite a bit of effort to fully secure those coins and success is not guaranteed. Probably not quite what the OP is claiming:

Which "respective ETH" are you referring to? The DAO ones? Those are the ones that don't have their "siblings" on the opposite chain. All others do.

And the OP hasn't answered a simple question. Has he/she contacted the "white hats" to find out what their intentions are? Going around with petitions and legal threats is a bit premature if there hasn't even been a response one way or the other.

OK, when you gave the car to the mechanics they used some of the original parts on another dead vehicle and sold them both.

Do you claim part of their profit?

Take it as a windfall for their efforts. They were the ones burning the midnight oil trying to save ETH. Not any of us. They got lucky. Meh.

I think it does differ in one substantial aspect. The DAO investors made a bad investment. Under normal circumstances that would be the end of it. Even the US govt didn't bail out Madoff's investors. In this case the choice was either:

1) Do nothing, the DAO investors lose money, those not invested in the DAO don't suffer any losses.

or

2) Bail them out, no one suffers any losses, those not invested in the DAO may get a bonus if the non-forked chain gains any value (few could have predicted that).

The OP is saying that he/she is entitled not only to the bailout but also to the bonus. Perhaps the "white hats" should just burn the ETC and end the OP's suffering.

Scenerio 1

Ethereum returns the ETC funds to its rightful owners. This causes an increased supply of ETC and therefore will most likely result in greater selling pressure. Most DAO holders will most likely cash out of there ETC position driving the price to the ground. Ethereum will no longer have a legal thorn by its side and can move on.

Scenerio 2

Ethereum Devs decide to keep the ETC. This proves Ethereum team can't be trusted & ignites a whole range of legal issues.

Scenerio 3

Ethereum Devs decide that they will not move the ETC and dispose of the private keys. ETC is now more scarce than Ethereum and they still have issue with legality of the whole thing.

IF the thief is able to have access and move his funds, why would the Ethereum team be reluctant to compensate honest DAO investors. ETC is now listed in all the top exchanges. This rash is not going to go away.

Not sure what you mean by "kept & split". The DAO was drained by assorted hackers, black hat, white hat, whatever.

There was no insurance obviously, nor is there one in a lemon car buyback situation, or when you get a refund from Amazon or Walmart when you return something. And if somehow you tried do double-dip via insurance that would be obviously fraud.

I'm not saying that the "white hats" can't decide to distribute the ETC. They could, just like Ford could decide to give you extra $5k for pain and suffering. I'm just saying that OP's entitlement doesn't make sense and I doubt it would stand in court although I would like to see him/her try. Unfortunately the OP backpedaled from that so it's just words now. "I want it because it has value". Good luck with that.