Neo & Bee talk (spam free thread) - page 56.

thekekk

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Finaly Danny back and closed the spam thread

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6030319

Quote

So this thread has gotten out of hand and will be locked following this post.

My recent silence has been forced due to the actions of two people, one of which has been posting on here thinking they know me and have the inside knowledge about my life which is largely false and they really should obtain some better sources, however those posts had much wider ramifications than they probably assumed they would have, so I hold them partially responsible for what has occurred since their posts.

I left Cyprus on a short term temporary basis for reasons that will follow, I haven't shipped anything from Cyprus and I certainly haven't run away with company or peoples money or bitcoins. Following those posts on the forum, I received direct threats targeted directly at my daughter, they have been reported to the relevant authorities, Once those threats were made I took the advice to remain outside of Cyprus and remove contact with anyone that could be responsible for the threats, this included not speaking with members of staff that could be responsible.

My reasons for leaving was to raise additional capital for the business through the sale of my equity as we had run out of liquidity, I had exhausted all of my own liquidity too through directors loans to the company. Every single Bitcoin raised and spent is accounted for, any claims of embezzlement are nothing but empty claims with no foundation. There were coins lost in BitFunder/WeExchange which I personally covered and assumed that debt of 1420BTC to ensure the company could continue unaffected, UKYO also owes me an additional 260BTC separately from the 1420BTC. I also have 369.8BTC of my own Bitcoin stuck with MtGox that would have been given to the company to settle all creditors and continue operations whilst more capital was raised. Having funds on MtGox was a personal risk that I assumed and no company funds were ever held on there.

My original plan was to raise more capital to allow the company to achieve its potential through the sale of some of my equity. The moment threats were made towards my daughter this plan changed and I decided I would sell all of my equity, allowing the new owner to appoint a new CEO.

The whole process will be completed and handled through an agency that specializes in these matters, once the final details are completed, the agency details will be made available to interested parties who wish to purchase 100% of my equity in LMB Subsidiaries Ltd thus taking full control of all subsidiaries. I shall also be providing the new owner full rights over the Bitcoin debts currently owed by BitFunder/WeExchange as I know people are working on a solution to recovering those debts for everyone that has funds stuck there. This process will also write off all directors loans I have made to the company and I shall not receive any financial compensation through this sale process.

My biggest mistake was using BitFunder/WeExchange during the initial stages of fund raising, had I not had to cover those losses my pockets would have been deep enough to cover all creditors and OPEX for the foreseeable future allowing the company to achieve a positive cash flow during that period, the choice was one made by myself and for that I am responsible for that decision. I am working towards having this entire process completed within a short period of time to enable the business to recover, to ensure that those invested do not lose out following this process.

I apologize for my silence but I would like to reiterate that ZERO customer funds are under my control and none have been lost or used for business purposes. My decisions are based on what I deem to be the best option for my family.

spinoff

newbie

Activity: 37

Merit: 0

I agree that with five minutes of his time Danny could clear up a lot of things, but we've seen it in the past, he tends to not communicate bad news, which is very stupid IMHO. so I'm supposing there's indeed some bad news, maybe not a show stopper, but we'll only get very fuzzy details

waveofuture

newbie

Activity: 15

Merit: 0

Quote from: uhoh on April 01, 2014, 08:43:55 PM

Must admit, not particularly worried at present , but it would take a matter of minutes for Danny to set the record straight and he hasn't bothered. This is pretty shitty regardless of how you look at it. I've got a fair chunk of money invested in these guys, all I want in return is some communication (whether it's good or awful). Freezing trading with no upfront dialogue between Neo and their shareholders is, frankly, unforgivable.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. It's difficult to understand what's happening and a little [more] communication would go a long way. Though, I have to disagree in characterizing the incommunicado-ness as "unforgivable," as there are numerous factors we aren't considering or privy to.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Something I didn't state but have considered is it maybe something as sime as inking a deal.
...
Regulatory seems logical due to the context of the discussions taking place last week.

This would be nice. We can hope for the best.

uhoh

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Circle gets the Square

Quote from: Herp on April 01, 2014, 08:59:45 PM

@uhoh

We've heard from Danny on Monday. Let's give it few more days at least for more updates. Danny is working to come before us with something concrete, like a resolution and a plan to move things forward. He said as much in his Monday statement. Let's give the guy a breather and a few days to work things out.

We can be passive and moan about it, give more ammo to competitor paid shills, fall into their traps or try to be proactive and help out as much as we can. I'm personally not much of a fan of the lazy distant type of investor, who sits on his ass waiting for the paycheck to come. We can all get involved to help Neo grow, each one of us can contribute to the efforts. If not by actually promoting it and helping out in a direct way, we should at least keep our emo fits and tantrums in check.

Be sure that if Danny doesn't come forward with specific statements, he has good reasons for it and many of these are in the best interest of shareholders. I can mention a few in PMs if you want.

Cheers Herp

I've not been following this much since the trade freeze if i'm honest.

I want them to succeed as much as anyone. I thought their ad campaign was fantastic, I just don't like to see it completely negated by the media picking up on this story of Danny's 'disappearance' (which they have). The only point i'm making is that this undoing of all the good they've done so far is completely unnecessary. As much as they are working on a solution and working hard (and I don't deny for a second that they are) it's all going to be in vain if they maintain their silence.

Herp

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

@uhoh

We've heard from Danny on Monday. Let's give it few more days at least for more updates. Danny is working to come before us with something concrete, like a resolution and a plan to move things forward. He said as much in his Monday statement. Let's give the guy a breather and a few days to work things out.

We can be passive and moan about it, give more ammo to competitor paid shills, fall into their traps or try to be proactive and help out as much as we can. I'm personally not much of a fan of the lazy distant type of investor, who sits on his ass waiting for the paycheck to come. We can all get involved to help Neo grow, each one of us can contribute to the efforts. If not by actually promoting it and helping out in a direct way, we should at least keep our emo fits and tantrums in check.

Be sure that if Danny doesn't come forward with specific statements, he has good reasons for it and many of these are in the best interest of shareholders. I can mention a few in PMs if you want.

uhoh

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Circle gets the Square

Quote from: NanoAkron on April 01, 2014, 08:52:44 PM

They're still trading because they haven't done anything in the real world yet so as to be subject to a wave of criticism and negativity, combined with stock pump & dumps.

Neo stopped trading because of suspicious trades. They're working to resolve the issue.

I'm sure they are .. but 2 minutes out of the day to reassure shareholders and take the media off a brand-damaging hunt is not much to ask

NanoAkron

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

They're still trading because they haven't done anything in the real world yet so as to be subject to a wave of criticism and negativity, combined with stock pump & dumps.

Neo stopped trading because of suspicious trades. They're working to resolve the issue.

uhoh

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Circle gets the Square

Must admit, not particularly worried at present , but it would take a matter of minutes for Danny to set the record straight and he hasn't bothered. This is pretty shitty regardless of how you look at it. I've got a fair chunk of money invested in these guys, all I want in return is some communication (whether it's good or awful). Freezing trading with no upfront dialogue between Neo and their shareholders is, frankly, unforgivable.

EDIT:

Quote from: NanoAkron on April 01, 2014, 06:40:24 PM

And why isn't anyone crowing about CFIG? They've not posted anything for months, but they're still sitting there with 17,000 BTC and nobody's running around screaming that they 'deserve answers'.

CFIG is still trading, that's why.

waveofuture

newbie

Activity: 15

Merit: 0

^ Hear ye.

There is a long history of ingrained thought and behaviour in the current system. It's going to take a steady mind and hand when talking and dealing with people distrustful of bitcoin - that's ok! Heck, it's preferable in some senses.

Neo's leadership may possibly need this break of sorts. They can take a long deep breath, meditate, think of family, and unequivocally know there to be a genuine populace wholly supportive and excited to assist in this endeavor and vision.

Herp

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: NanoAkron on April 01, 2014, 06:40:24 PM

Thanks for the summary Herp. Factual and without any conjecture.

Here's a bit of conjecture for you, for what it's worth:

NEOBEE is experiencing the natural kickback one would expect when trying to revolutionise an entrenched banking sector on a financially distraught island. Danny is back in the UK visiting the family and having some downtime before getting straight back to work.

Anyone who runs around screaming 'the sky is falling' and 'we all deserve answers' is either a very immature investor, a very immature person, or both.

One thing that does concern me though is quite how much power certain actors in the bitcoin world have over the finances of the rest of us - Karpeles with GOX, MP with Havelock.

My take on MP - he's got a load of BTC from the early days and hates seeing Havelock succeed. So he's bought in to every decent stock on there to the tune of hundreds or thousands of BTC, and will use his leverage to crash anything that looks like it's going to succeed. I don't know his motivations, but I can bet you that's part of his strategy.

And why isn't anyone crowing about CFIG? They've not posted anything for months, but they're still sitting there with 17,000 BTC and nobody's running around screaming that they 'deserve answers'.

Refreshing to see a mature take on things.

You're so right about immaturity of the average Bitcoin investor. Many are geeks not used to investing on regular stock exchanges, totally unaware of how reporting is done and how news are communicated nor are they aware about the usual hardships a fledgling business like Neo has to face. The trials and tribulations that any new company has to go through to reach its potential is something unknown to many of the investors here. Neo is also operating in a paradigm shift sector where pressure from entrenched interests is high.

This is what basically happened with all this disinformation and mud-slicking. Cyprus central bank and their lobby had their way in round one of the fight. MPEx sharks smelled blood and moved in for the kill to wipe out the competition at a critical moment, using "kick 'em while they're down" strategy. Very evil and despicable of MPEx

Even if worst case scenario unfolds and Neo doesn't manage to operate their branch according to plan, I can at least say I was part of something great. Neo managed to change the world, to raise awareness about Bitcoin and turn a country who never heard of Bitcoin before into a country where everyone's talking about it. Worst case scenario I've donated money to a very worthy cause. Everyone who invested in Neo should be proud of it.

On the other side we have this jealous egocentric MP who can't stand seeing others being more successful than him, a bitter and sad little man, paying monthly wage to an employee to constantly bash his competitors. In a ironic twist of events, we'll most likely see him facing charges and follow same path other exchanges he tried to wipe out did http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21xrov/mpex_owner_getting_letters_from_us_gov_in_danger/ . His disgusting attacks on Burnside come to mind, one of the most honest Bitcoin business operators.

It's up to all of us shareholders to fight and make Neo succeed. We can either give in, create a self-fulfilling prophecy and abandon Danny and the guys in their hour of need or we can stand together to fight these disgusting psychopaths.

It's your choice.

NanoAkron

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Thanks for the summary Herp. Factual and without any conjecture.

Here's a bit of conjecture for you, for what it's worth:

NEOBEE is experiencing the natural kickback one would expect when trying to revolutionise an entrenched banking sector on a financially distraught island. Danny is back in the UK visiting the family and having some downtime before getting straight back to work.

Anyone who runs around screaming 'the sky is falling' and 'we all deserve answers' is either a very immature investor, a very immature person, or both.

One thing that does concern me though is quite how much power certain actors in the bitcoin world have over the finances of the rest of us - Karpeles with GOX, MP with Havelock.

My take on MP - he's got a load of BTC from the early days and hates seeing Havelock succeed. So he's bought in to every decent stock on there to the tune of hundreds or thousands of BTC, and will use his leverage to crash anything that looks like it's going to succeed. I don't know his motivations, but I can bet you that's part of his strategy.

And why isn't anyone crowing about CFIG? They've not posted anything for months, but they're still sitting there with 17,000 BTC and nobody's running around screaming that they 'deserve answers'.

Herp

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

To recap so far:

- NEOBEE goes relatively silent after the 18th of March
- some media appearances and ads
- Danny leaves Cyprus for the UK (not sure when, with in the last week?)
- share price begins to tank
- Trading of shares here on bitcointalk (btcapples)
- share trading on havelock is stopped by NeoBee Complaince officer.
- TAT quits in what appears to be a fit of rage (don't know him other than I've lurker and seen him involved in the securities for awhile...to my understanding is a trusted actor in community).
- no official statements and the actors involved at all silent, no reasons are given for current actions.

I think it's safe to say that the authorities are involved at this point and the complete lockdown on information is probably related to that.

Scam is unlikely as Danny did communicate through coindesk as much as he could.

He communicated it's a) personal and b) made worse or became a problem, due to actions on these boards.

It may have nothing to do with NeoBee and it might be something that is now effecting Danny's ability to be CEO.

Hmmm wonder wonder wonder...some real news would be nice.

Here is my take on how events unfolded:

-March 18th the Cyprus parliament hearing https://twitter.com/BtcDanny/status/445817697444851712 Prior to this hearing Neo also received a letter from Cyprus central bank
-March 21st last Neobee tweet https://twitter.com/NeoandBee/status/446926337945894912 3 days after the Parliament hearing
-after some time of tweeter and forum silence, the MPEx sharks sniffs blood following those hearings (where Neo faced some opposition) and silence period and start disinformation campaign using agent provocateur and multiple shill accounts
-disinformation campaign is somewhat successful and price drops
-suspicious sale thread emerges in a manipulation attempt to drive down the share price created by BTCApples user (who starts negative trolling in Neo thread following the sale, even though he claimed he sold out). Shares were advertised at a price much lower than share price at the time. I've warned in that thread even, whole sale looked suspicious.
-following this suspicious sale share price drops even more
-a trading halt is requested by Neo security officer invoking suspicious activity on LMB website where BTCApples supposedly sold his shares and trading on Havelock is halted
-Coindesk article appears as a result of the trading halt, causing further edginess among investors
-Danny comes out with a statement on Coindesk (in the same article), saying he's and I quote "TEMPORARILY" in UK, letting investors know the disinformation spread on forums made Neo's situation more difficult.
-other media outlets pick up the Coindesk article

Herp

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: NanoAkron on April 01, 2014, 02:39:58 PM

I'm still seeing NotLambChop in this thread.

Can the person who promised us a cleaner thread here start doing something about this?

Check again. He managed to squeeze one in.

GreenBits

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1048

Quote from: jakedeez on April 01, 2014, 02:45:46 PM

Green - I realize that manipulation of registered, listed, real stocks is illegal. However, none of that is necessarily applicable to "stocks" that are not real, in companies that may or may not be real, and are traded for magic internet money on a server in someone's basement in Burunga.

I don't happen to be willing to invest in N&B, but I am not one of the guys saying that they have committed a fraud or anything... What I am saying is NO ONE should trust ANY of these "Securities".

People on these boards act like for some reasons Havelock, or who ever else is going to be forced to be a good actor by some set of imaginary laws. There is NO safety in these "investments". Again, not calling any individual company a scam here, but it is just too easy to run a scam. I really think people shouldn't be investing on these exchanges. You have no idea what actual property rights you have, nor do you have any real way of enforcing them. It is really seems crazy to me.

These are most definitely securities:

SEC. 205. DEFINITION AND TREATMENT OF BANKING PRODUCTS.

(a) DEFINITION OF TRADITIONAL BANKING PRODUCT- For purposes of paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 3(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a) (4), (5)), the term ‘traditional banking product’ means--
(1) a deposit account, savings account, certificate of deposit, or other deposit instrument issued by a bank;
(2) a banker’s acceptance;
(3) a letter of credit issued or loan made by a bank;
(4) a debit account at a bank arising from a credit card or similar arrangement;
(5) a participation in a loan which the bank or an affiliate of the bank (other than a broker or dealer) funds, participates in, or owns that is sold--
(A) to qualified investors; or
(B) to other persons that--
(i) have the opportunity to review and assess any material information, including information regarding the borrower’s creditworthiness; and
based on such factors as financial sophistication, net worth, and knowledge and experience in financial matters, have the capability to evaluate the information available, as determined under generally applicable banking standards or guidelines; and
Also,

SEC. 206. DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENT AND QUALIFIED INVESTOR DEFINED.
Section 3(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
‘(54) DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENT-
‘(A) DEFINITION- The term ‘derivative instrument’ means any individually negotiated contract, agreement, warrant, note, or option that is based, in whole or in part, on the value of, any interest in, or any quantitative measure or the occurrence of any event relating to, one or more commodities, securities, currencies, interest or other rates, indices, or other assets, but does not include a traditional banking product, as defined in section 205(a) of the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.
‘(B) CLASSIFICATION LIMITED- Classification of a particular contract as a derivative instrument pursuant to this paragraph shall not be construed as finding or implying that such instrument is or is not a security for any purpose under the securities laws, or is or is not an account, agreement, contract, or transaction for any purpose under the Commodity Exchange Act.
....‘(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY- The Commission may, by rule or order, define a ‘qualified investor’ as any other person, taking into consideration such factors as the financial sophistication of the person, net worth, and knowledge and experience in financial matters.’.

Essentially, Im proposing that NEO, by statement of intent, would be considered a bank or affiliate, and the product they offer could be construed as a certificate of deposit or a loan at the very least (the dividends could be considered interest, or a profit sharing scheme). The issuing of a prospectus also indicates intent.

It can also be argued as a derivative instrument, but that argument is beyond me.
All paid for with ~~btc~~ property (as per the recent IRS clarification), so the purchase is just as valid as it would be if it were fiat.

~Green

Can a legal dude come review this please? Im no expert and I dont want to disseminate false information.

jakedeez

sr. member

Activity: 512

Merit: 250

ICO is evil

Green - I realize that manipulation of registered, listed, real stocks is illegal. However, none of that is necessarily applicable to "stocks" that are not real, in companies that may or may not be real, and are traded for magic internet money on a server in someone's basement in Burunga.

I don't happen to be willing to invest in N&B, but I am not one of the guys saying that they have committed a fraud or anything... What I am saying is NO ONE should trust ANY of these "Securities".

People on these boards act like for some reasons Havelock, or who ever else is going to be forced to be a good actor by some set of imaginary laws. There is NO safety in these "investments". Again, not calling any individual company a scam here, but it is just too easy to run a scam. I really think people shouldn't be investing on these exchanges. You have no idea what actual property rights you have, nor do you have any real way of enforcing them. It is really seems crazy to me.

NanoAkron

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

I'm still seeing NotLambChop in this thread.

Can the person who promised us a cleaner thread here start doing something about this?

GreenBits

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1048

Quote from: ?? on ??

I thought Panama wasn't governed by US law Huh

And you would be right. But my country is a bit heavy handed and stubborn in these matters:

Use of Compulsory Powers

Section 21(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, authorizes the SEC to conduct investigations on behalf of foreign securities authorities (as defined by the Exchange Act) and compel the production of documents and testimony from any person and entity, irrespective of whether that person or entity is regulated by the SEC. Section 21(a)(2) provides:

On request, the Commission may provide assistance in accordance with this paragraph if the requesting authority states that the requesting authority is conducting an investigation which it deems necessary to determine whether any person has violated, is violating, or is about to violate any laws or rules relating to securities matters that the requesting authority administers or enforces. The Commission may, in its discretion, conduct such investigation as the Commission deems necessary to collect information and evidence pertinent to the request for assistance. Such assistance may be provided without regard to whether the facts stated in the request would also constitute a violation of the laws of the United States. In deciding whether to provide such assistance, the Commission shall consider whether (A) the requesting authority has agreed to provide reciprocal assistance in securities matters to the Commission; and (B) compliance with the request would prejudice the public interest of the United States.

We tend to get what we want. Its the American way

But, I hope this illustrates the import of what has occurred here. This is no small matter.
(edit)Also, investigate this:

SEC v. Alexis Ampudia, a/k/a Alexis Geancarlos Ampudia Navalo, a/k/a Alexis Emias, a/k/a Alexis Rojas, Civil Action No. 07-CV-2762 (HB) (S.D.N.Y) (filed June 2009) (final judgement in action involving manipulation of numerous securities by Panamanian citizen) LR-21071, LR-20098, LR-20071

(double edit) this too:
SEC v. East Delta Resources Corp., Victor Sun, David Amsel and Mayer Amsel, Civil No. CV10-0310 (E.D.N.Y.) (filed January 2010) (settlement on alleged manipulation scheme through Canadian and US brokerage accounts) LR-21700, LR-21395

~Green

GreenBits

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1048

Legal isn't my sphere, but check this out. I get the trader jargon but some of the legalese is beyond me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securities_Exchange_Act_of_1934#Antifraud_provisions

which yields:

Section 10(b) of the Act (as amended) provides (in pertinent part):
(b) To use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange or any security not so registered, or any securities-based swap agreement (as defined in section 206B of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act), any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of such rules and regulations as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors.
.
You can argue jurisdiction, but for the US, participation in this grants the SEC jurisdiction. If they didnt have jurisdiction for some amazing reason (and didnt act regardless of this), they would simply use the FBI. If you think thats far fetched, observe this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/31/fbi-high-speed-trading_n_5065622.html

Also, its clearly defined that this behavior is considered fraud, posted here
http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/cyberfraud.htm

which yields:

Online Bulletin Boards
Online bulletin boards are a way for investors to share information. While some messages may be true, many turn out to be bogus – or even scams. Fraudsters may use online discussions to pump up a company or pretend to reveal "inside" information about upcoming announcements, new products, or lucrative contracts.

You may never know for certain who you're dealing with, or whether they're credible, because many sites allow users to hide their identity behind multiple aliases. People claiming to be unbiased observers may actually be insiders, large shareholders, or paid promoters. One person can easily create the illusion of widespread interest in a small, thinly traded stock by posting numerous messages under various aliases.

Also, see here:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/analyst/030102.asp

S&D Traders Manipulate Stock Prices With Smear Campaigns
A less-publicized and more-sinister version of short selling can take place on Wall Street. It's called "short and distort" (S&D).

Nothing is inherently wrong with short selling, which is permissible under the regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, the S&D type of short seller uses misinformation and a bear market to manipulate stocks. S&D is as illegal as the pump and dump, but is mainly used in a bear market. It is important for investors to be aware of the dangers and to know how to protect themselves...

...On the other hand, S&D (shock and distort) traders manipulate stock prices in a bear market by taking short positions and then using a smear campaign to drive down the price of the targeted stock. This is the inverse version of the "pump and dump" tactic, whereby crooks buy stock (take a long position) and issue false information that causes the target stock's price to increase...

...The S&D shysters try to profit by stimulating fear, but this only works if they have credibility. As such, when working online they will often use screen names and email addresses that imply that they are associated with the SEC or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) (formerly the National Association of Securities Dealers), or that they can regularly spot worthless stocks. Their goal is to convince investors that every proponent of the stock has ties to the company and that the SEC is watching and will halt the stock. S&Ds also intimate that they are looking out for investors' interests.

S&D players clutter message boards, so optimistic information cannot easily be found. "Get out before it all comes crashing down" and "Investors who wish to enter a class action lawsuit can contact…" are typical posts, as are their projections of $0 stock prices and 100% losses. If their strategy is suspected by "longs", they attack the person who has caught them. In other words, the market manipulator will do everything in his or her power to keep buyers out of the stock and keep the price heading south.

This is also known as a "bear raid"

Im not quite sure, but this also might be provisioned under Microcap Fraud, given the size of the company and the fact it is unregistered.
https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/microcap-fraud.shtml

This would also be considered fraud in almost every jurisdiction it could occur in, including Panama. Which is obviously criminally and civilly actionable.

Speaking of which (edit):
http://www.supervalores.gob.pa/files/informacion_al_inversionista/LISTADO_DE_JURISDICCIONES_RECONOCIDAS.pdf
Which establishes jusrisdiction in the United States, inversely:

http://www.sec.gov/about/offices/oia/oia_crossborder.shtml
Which defines jurisdiction abroad (conferred by cooperation from foreign governments)

Hope this helps, feel free to help me understand this more if I am in error. I'm sure one of the legal subsection guys can provide clarification on this. At the very least; this would be considered libel and the perp, if identified, would be civilly liable for damages caused to NEOBEE.

~Green

jakedeez

sr. member

Activity: 512

Merit: 250

ICO is evil

Quote from: GreenBits on March 31, 2014, 09:13:30 PM

I made an observation on the coindesk article concerning the trading freeze:

http://www.coindesk.com/neo-bees-suspends-btc-share-trading-due-abnormal-activity/

...Someone will be legally liable for this price manipulation eventually. The magnitude of investor in this particular game (NEOBEE) will not allow foolery of this nature. My curiosity; will it just be the the perpetrators of the false rumors, or the social outlets that allowed the dissemination of this false information without moderation?

And I notice we finally got some moderation on the parent thread. Cleaned up quite nice, but unfortunate they had to ban MPOE-PR. I don't agree with some of her opinions, but I hate to see anyone banned.

I hope this isnt considered off topic, that isnt my wish at all.

~Green

Not that I don't disagree that manipulation is wrong, can you point to some actual law that prohibits manipulations of non-registered, non-regulated, bitcoin denominated stock trading on a private exchange in Panama? In what jurisdiction will the "someone" be liable?

velacreations

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

I didn't mind all the accounts, really, I had them all on ignore. By some of my funnier comments got deleted, though. Oh well.

Topic: Neo & Bee talk (spam free thread) - page 56. (Read 261786 times)