Topic: Scammer tag: Nefario. - page 9. (Read 17462 times)

I think this is the most important thing here. Asset issuers pay 16BTC up front, and every shareholder pays trading fees, to make this service continue functioning.

GLBSE has no policy to deal with moving assets off the exchange, and it badly needs one. Imagine if NASDAQ decided to just suddenly delist Facebook with no warning: the SEC would be so far up NASDAQ's ass, they could collectively taste shoe leather.

Sounds like someone has nothing better to do.

Ahh, but the problem with all of the current exchanges (including GLBSE) is that they not only provide the service of facilitating the sale, but they also act as the sole recorder of ownership.

Thats doesnt fly IMO. You paid fees to acquire (or sell) the assets. That service has been delivered. Now you want another service, ie, sell your assets again, and nefario is no longer offering that service, and so wont be charging you for it. I see no reason for nefario to reimburse you.

(btw, not trying to be a spelling nazi, but its spelled "paid")

I hold some (a small amount) of the delisted assets.

I do not accept the GLBSE codes, but i feel that i have nowhere to turn.
How can i be sure that noone else has my code? And how can i know Goat has my code?

I trusted GLBSE - that was my misstake.

I entered into a contract with goat, using GLBSE as a middle man.

I PAYED GLBSE for carrying out my transactions with goat, and i was under the impression that GLBSE would continue to serve as a middle man.
If it would have been a deal with just Goat, we wouldnt have had to pay you.


They important point is just that: I PAYED for a service which GLBSE no longer provides.

So Nefario, when you delisted my bonds you should PAY ME the trade fee, since i have to do it all by myself from now on.



Is GLBSE a Scam, in regards to me?
- A serious venture doesnt drop customers when they stop profiting from them. Is it a scan when GLBSE takes money for trading assets and then withdraws the service? (from a select set of users)

Should Nefario be able to delist assests without being a scammer? YES, but obviously he doesnt

At this point, largely hearing only your side of the story, it sounds like you are trying to resolve the issue and they are holding undisputed amounts hostage while blaming you for their bad decisions. If I were in your shoes, I would not accept the GLBSE codes either without some plan for how to handle duplicate or invalid codes and some way to communicate a redemption timeframe to code holders. Or some comparable solution -- maybe GLBSE knows some clever way the codes are supposed to work that we can't think of, but they aren't telling.

I don't understand where GLBSE thinks they get the authority to issue these codes without negotiating a delisting procedure with you. And by failing to even try to do that, they've seriously betrayed their customers who now have a worthless code, with no known redemption scheme, instead of an ownership interest in an asset.

GLBSE itself doesnt hold many bitcoins since asset issuers withdraw them for their business.

It's much too late for the later part. The former would in principle be a formality. Nefario (and to the degree it has been aiding and abetting him, GLBSE too) are the largest liability for Bitcoin right now. Noobs join, get scammed by the Global Scam Exchange, then leave. How many intelligent people and how many affluent people have we lost because this eyesore was irresponsibly allowed to continue for so long?

Ask yourself this. You discover BTC, you put some money into it, you go "invest it" and then... it's gone. And you try again. And then... it's gone. There are people who have been going through this quarterly cycle since early 2011. What fraction are they of the total people trying out this appalling scamfest that is called GLBSE and thinking they "have tried out Bitcoin"?

This association needs to be severed. In fact, it should have been severed long ago. And yes, GLBSE has scammed investors out of more money than pirateat40 did. They just were much better at the long-con.

I meant to resolve the issue of people who hold your delisted assets and the harm Nefario's decision to immediately delist those assets has done to them. To get back amounts that are not in dispute, there's nothing more you should have to do. If Nefario/GLBSE is holding them hostage for a better negotiating position, that warrants a scammer tag.

1 person having complete control of the exchange seems to be a problem. I am sure he is doing the best he can, but you have to understand all this be made up as he goes i'm sure. But returning goats coins is the right thing, I think he should have been given X amount of time to clear his account then be delisted. In the future I hope this is how all of it is take care of. Emotional business is bad business, and I feel this was the case here.

everybody has the right to open a scam-accusation thread. and this is good

i dont really like MPEX and his exchange - but this does not mean he is'nt right in this case.

not your fight.

none of your business.

i could understand if Diablo opened this thread but god damn.

To clarify some points for the typically confused:

I. There can never be a "conflict of interest" in this matter. It makes no difference who makes the accusation. All that matters is whether the accusation is factual and has merit. You're probably thinking based on some personal experience in some domestic dispute, but that's largely irrelevant; the reason Mr. Policeman or whatever adult figure dismissed your accusations at that time was that they were based on your own testimony, not that they were improper by "conflict of interest" (a topic one'd be best advised to read up on, anyway).

II. There exists the doctrine of "duty of care", both in common and civil law systems. Read up on that (preferably in a law manual, not on wikipedia). Somebody with power has a duty to act equally to protect all those that need his protection. He can't pick and choose. The discussion here revolves around exactly that; Nefario has acted in some cases but not in all cases. This means he was either wrong to act at all, in which case he should make whole those harmed by his action, or otherwise that he was wrong to not act in the cases where he did not act, in which case he should make whole those harmed by his inaction. Tertium non datur as they say, there is absolutely no alternative here. Either one or the other must be true.

All the rest of the discussion is absolutely irrelevant, but obviously you're more than welcome to carry on with it.

Based on Nefario's actions with both DMC and Goat's assets, I think maybe it it really is time for nefario to get a scammer tag.

Nefario claimed that at first, so Goat gave him an address so he would have no excuse. If you look in the other thread, you can see what Goat claims Nefario's response was -- let's just say he didn't return even the amounts that are not in dispute.

Are you saying it's not true that Nefario is holding onto funds that belong to Goat even though there is no dispute regarding those funds? If so, I'd like to know why you say that.

Also, do you have any response to the allegation that he orchestrated GLBSE's renege on its obligation to Goat's asset-holders, changing their ownership of listed assets into worthless claim codes? (Worthless because there is no known way anyone but GLBSE can redeem them, and GLBSE refuses to redeem them. So there is nothing anyone can do with them.)

What would be insane is if this winds up with Nefario getting a scammer tag and GLBSE losing the community's trust. Someone at GLBSE needs to take charge of this situation and fix it. (Assuming Goat will cooperate. If not, they have to at least try.)

As far as i know Goat is refusing to give Nefario a BTC adress because Goat feels like giving him the adresse would be like accepting his delisting.

In my opinion MPOE-PR should NOT have started this thread. This will backfire on MPOE.

In before only cryptostocks left...

The four issues that seem the most serious to me are:

1) Nefario seems to be holding coins that are indisputably Goat's, which he refuses to return.

2) Nefario seems to have decided for GLBSE that GLBSE has no responsibility to protect the ownership interests of GLBSE's customers. Essentially, Nefario has retroactively decided that when GLBSE delists a stock, there is no obligation whatsoever to protect the interests of asset holders. That is, Nefario decided GLBSE would fail to honor its obligations to its customers and leave them and Goat to pick up the pieces as best they can.

3) Nefario appears to have delisted Goat's assets on a whim, in response to an unrelated dispute, and without any sort of sensible decision-making process or calibrated level of response. (For example, the asset could have just been frozen.) While I don't dispute that an exchange has the right to delist assets for any reason, doing so for very bad reasons and doing so in a sudden manner that screwed over his customers is effectively scamming. Customers should have been able to rely on the exchange to continue to provide them a way to transfer their ownership interest and not to cut off this ability arbitrarily without any justification. When you buy a share on a stock exchange, part of the reason you value it is that the exchange allows you to trade it. No rational reason for this drastic action that caused harm to both Goat and his asset holders has been offered.

4) So far, there has been no explanation from Nefario for any of these actions.

If there is some justification for these actions, it has not been made public. Goat granted Nefario permission to make a public statement, so there's no privacy issue with Goat. (There might be other privacy issues though. I don't know.)

Got to admit there is kind of a big conflict of interest here from the accuser.

Wasn't Nefario and pretty much all these scenarios kinda mooted last time they were brought up in an official capacity.

So what is your reason to bring it up again, other than try to further tarnish the name of him and his site?

atm goat is still waiting for his coins - if he dont get them i vote scammer.
otherwise i just vote "nefario should not run a marketplace"

Maybe someone should investigate why MPOE and BITVPS passthroughs have lost so much money for their investors on GLBSE too ?

Dont throw bricks in glass houses.