Topic: Scammer tag: Nefario. - page 5. (Read 17482 times)

@ MPOE-PR -   Here is a handy post with all of Matthewh3's updates about GBLSE.  Someone said they can't PM Nefario at this point.


https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/have-questions-about-gblse-shutdown-ask-matthewh3-unofficial-spokesperson-117009

The guy is mostly famous for

from his red star mining thread.

So basically the fearsome terrorists are mostly shut-in wankers of great danger. Oh how the worldview changes by the minute.

Seriously now. What terrorists?

I would have never thought people would be less likely to shoot each other when they can trade instead

I have to agree.  If Nefario's not willing to come here and make an official statement himself then he needs to write an official statement for posting by someone else.  It's really just adding to the confusion having people who've spoken to Nefario posting stuff which is in conflict with what's been posted on the website.  Either Nefario or the shareholders need to clarify which version of the truth is the factual truth as it's going to affect the willingness of users to submit claims.

MatthewH3 - Again here you are giving us the inside scoop???   Also his usename is Nefario.    Also what do you mean by "I think Nafario has contacted all major shareholders and won a motion to stay CEO as well".  It is so interesting you have all this info but the person whole should be making official statements is no where to be found?  

Few people used The Armory because the majority of users could obtain weapons cheaper, more conveniently and legally elsewhere.  Delivery is the weak point for illegal goods which are physical - it's where the illegal activity is most vulnerable.  Bitcoin is obviously attractive for laundering the proceeds of those illegal activities, though.

With child porn, you have a product which can be delivered digitally - the weak link in the chain is payment.  When you can anonymise both payment and delivery, you lessen the risk of detection.

A third alternative would be that the voices have been asking him to sacrifice a goat (and also close down glbse and spend theymos' unholy money on collectible first edition pet rocks).


This theory of yours would probably hold a lot more water if it weren't that the armory (that thing designed by SR to sell weapons, explosives and such) weren't closed for...economic reasons. That's right: nobody wanted to buy them, nobody had them for sale, it wasn't a political problem at all.

You'd think weapons would be the thing to interest these imaginary "terrorists" the US gov't keeps yakking about to distract everyone from the fact they're eating food their parents wouldn't have fed to stray dogs.

Just a thought.

Nope, just a lot of experience with how incredibly stupid human beings become in pursuit of money (419 scams, anyone).  While there are a fair number of ideological purists here and people trying to build legitimate, fully legal Bitcoin enterprises, just as surely as the nature of Bitcoin makes it a magnet for scammers it's also going to attract its fair share of bottom-feeders.

It's a mistake to assume that everyone who participates in Bitcoin actually cares about Bitcoin in and of itself.  For many, it's either just another way to make money scamming people or just another tool to facilitate already criminal activity.  SR prohibits the advertising of certain products/services precisely because they're realistic enough to know that people would use SR (and by extension BTC) to purchase them if they were advertised there.

I think that many people on here are actively seeking illegal investments rather than believing that the schemes offered here are in any way legitimate.  Perhaps they believe that there's less risk of being caught if their illegal activity takes place online or perhaps they don't have the real world connections to participate in high return illegal activity, but people were perfectly happy to keep throwing BTC at pirate when it was believed he was using them to launder money for unsavoury clients.  I have no doubt that if someone offered shares in a child porn distribution ring or a cocaine cartel on here there'd be users scrambling to get in on the action.

Correct. Hes not going to be posting here. And he isnt telling the shareholders anything either, even though they are supposedly footing the bill for his lawyer.

That's kind of what I suspected - that when he consulted an actual lawyer he found out that "because...Bitcoin" and being outside of the US did not insulate him from possible prosecution for AML/CTF and taxation/securities violations, despite what he'd so confidently claimed on here previously.

In future, when people offering financial services on this forum make such claims users should demand to see written legal opinions supporting those claims.  If the offerer can't provide them, it's reasonable to assume that they haven't sought any legal advice whatsoever and are just dribbling bullshit.

I think Nafario has contacted all major shareholders and won a motion to stay CEO as well.  I run RSM and in no way did he hint I'm under investegation.  I even offered to proxy ID for someone (who wishes to remain anonymous) assets and coins and he only warned me of potential problem arising from future investigations into his accounts and didn't tell me not to do it just only advised me on any future potential pitfalls.

Then you should be able to tell us whether or not he's shut down GBLSE in response to an immediate threat of prosecution by a regulatory authority or whether it's simply a pre-emptive move because consulting a lawyer about "legitimising" GBLSE made him aware of the enormity of the risks he was taking by facilitating anonymous trading of unregistered securities.

There is simply no excuse for him not providing this information to shareholders, even if you believe that issuers and users aren't entitled to that information.  If he's not providing that information because he's been advised not to by his lawyer, then he needs to state that.  If he says nothing, people are going to assume that GBSLE is under active investigation and that Nefario is co-operating with the authorities by helping them to obtain evidence which may be used to prosecute the issuers of unregistered securities (and possibly their users).  If GBLSE is under active investigation,  issuers can be expected to throw Nefario under a bus and claim that they relied on his assurances that their assets were legal because the exchange was operated outside of the US and ...Bitcoin.

At this point, it does matter whether the closure of GBLSE was pre-emptive or not.  People are going to assume the worst if it's not clarified and it's reasonable for them to do so. 

Yes and so he should.  I've had an asset on the exchange since version 1.0 and need to pay dividends.  We are also friends and I was digging information not just for myself but on the request of some others.

Well believe me or not but I also have Nafario on my personal Facebook as well as having his phone number.  You think I'm making this up then why would I do that.  I think Nafario has been directly in touch with the majority of shareholders and what he told me is nothing he hasn't already repeated on the phone at least several times today already.  

He told you this? That's funny, because he refused to tell the shareholders anything. He would not even confirm (never mind provide evidence) that he was under legal duress.

Can you, or one of the shareholders, clarify something for the rest of us?

"Risks jail time for funding terrorism, money laundering, etc" could mean that in the process of looking to legitimise GBLSE (and the fact that Nefario has openly posted that intention here implies that he knew GBLSE was not operating legitimately), his lawyer has become aware of how GBLSE was operating and said "holy fuck, close that shit down right now because you're violating AML/CTF laws all over the place and if the authorities find out what you've been doing you could go to jail - and make sure you get user information so that if this blows up at a later date you've covered your ass a bit".

Another option is that the authorities have become aware of GBLSE's activities and directed him to shut down GBLSE or face prosecution.

It's not clear from what's been posted by those who've had contact with Nefario whether the authorities have anything to do with this decision or whether it's a pre-emptive move which came about because when he finally consulted a lawyer about GBLSE, the reality of what he was doing and the risks he was taking finally sunk in for Nefario.  Can you shed any light at all on this?

Well I do I spoke to him on the phone.  He risks jail time for funding terrorism, money laundering and that's without any tax issues.  Nafario's get out of jail card is that everyone who wants to withdraw coins or shares will have to comply with AML regulations.  He also said he will soon have a way for assets to pay dividends but not trade shares.

That is absolutely not true. Otherwise, an unlicensed contractor could make a contract to do some work for you, take your money, and then say, "Sorry, I'm unlicensed. I can't legally do the work."

Of course, but it's always legal to pay damages. You're certainly right that you couldn't force the contractor in my example to do the work. But you can certainly get your money back alone with any other damages, including punitive damages.

That's pure speculation at this point, at least so far as I know. If the contractor in my example says, "Sorry, the contracting board says I'm not licensed to do the work. Bye.", do you just take his word for it and let him off the hook for any damages you suffered? Asset owners have suffered damages because they relied on GLBSE.