Then do it because the second motion is not over yet. Historically I'm pretty sure we've been having 7 day votes.
Based on the facts I see so far, we have voting results for the second motion I posted but not the first one. Is this correct?
Topic: Starting a new FPGA mining farm/contract! Cognitive Resurrected on[Havelock] - page 14. (Read 300490 times)
April 03, 2014, 10:26:19 PM
April 03, 2014, 10:24:49 PM
I'm saying we can safely assume 7 days because that was agreed on in one form or another in the past, once we moved away from the 2 week thing, and also based off the fact that the first motion was 7 days.
How can we assume 7 days if he already said the vote was over yesterday and counted them today? 7 days and we still have 2 more days. If that is the case I could buy 500 shares now and still win. That is a bit silly eh?
April 03, 2014, 10:22:53 PM
The second was started on the 27th to finish today.
Not True. Cog-PR said it had ended yesterday. I quoted him. I sold after he said it had ended and the results would be posted.
Garr clearly owes me a public apology or 25 BTC.
Garr if you pay the 25 BTC I will donated it to a charity and will make the transaction public. However I doubt you will man up and pay out.
It would be a lot easier to find if you'd stop deleting your posts
I originally voted against liquidation but I am inclined to change my vote (given the recent "mathing" - which though I haven't verified, looks legit). Garr, Sam, if you have a counter-argument to "300BTC versus 50BTC", you should post it now, or expect a flood of vote changing. =/
Garrett agrees with the math. Assuming these calculations are correct, it seems that our best option is to liquidate. Garrett is going to post the current results of the motion on the Cognitive Mining website tonight.
More updates to come.
- Samuel
It could be argued that he's talking about the current results not necessarily the final results.
Edit: And the 27th was 7 days ago.
April 03, 2014, 10:22:30 PM
I'm saying we can safely assume 7 days because that was agreed on in one form or another in the past, once we moved away from the 2 week thing, and also based off the fact that the first motion was 7 days.
April 03, 2014, 10:21:12 PM
we could probably assume 7 days
No we can not. It has not even been 7 days. And the Cog-PR guy said it was over and Garr agreed we needed to sell everything off.
April 03, 2014, 10:17:51 PM
Ah you are sort of right robotnik. One had start and end times, the other did not (but we could probably assume 7 days). Here are the two motions.
And then emailed March 27, 2014 12:29PM:
So which one is the google doc for? My votes were counted for the second one.
Quote
Motion Start Date: 3-20-2014
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Motion Terms:
- Refer to the most recent revision of the contract: http://cognitivemining.com/contract.html
Liquidation Terms:
- As always, one share = one vote
- If over 90% of votes are to liquidate their hardware, all of Cognitive's assets will be liquidated.
- If under 10% of votes are to liquidate their hardware, none will be liquidated.
- Shareholders have the option to liquidate 50% of owned shares.
- Cognitive will do it's best to sell hardware for the highest price possible while maintaining the goal of selling within one week, so as to provide a quick turnaround for those wishing to liquidate.
Something that should only be shared among shareholders: Soon, we will have the option to purchase in-stock hardware from Hashfast for under $3 per gh. We will Never send them money for hardware not being shipped the same day.
The forum is increasingly bloated so I will be making all important announcements via email.
As previously implied, things will be getting increasingly better for Cognitive after this hardware gets online, and those who want out can easily liquidate their hardware.
Please reply to vote with the following format and we will take care of the rest:
Motion: YES/NO
Liquidate: YES/NO
Best regards, and my sincere apologies,
Garrett
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Motion Terms:
- Refer to the most recent revision of the contract: http://cognitivemining.com/contract.html
Liquidation Terms:
- As always, one share = one vote
- If over 90% of votes are to liquidate their hardware, all of Cognitive's assets will be liquidated.
- If under 10% of votes are to liquidate their hardware, none will be liquidated.
- Shareholders have the option to liquidate 50% of owned shares.
- Cognitive will do it's best to sell hardware for the highest price possible while maintaining the goal of selling within one week, so as to provide a quick turnaround for those wishing to liquidate.
Something that should only be shared among shareholders: Soon, we will have the option to purchase in-stock hardware from Hashfast for under $3 per gh. We will Never send them money for hardware not being shipped the same day.
The forum is increasingly bloated so I will be making all important announcements via email.
As previously implied, things will be getting increasingly better for Cognitive after this hardware gets online, and those who want out can easily liquidate their hardware.
Please reply to vote with the following format and we will take care of the rest:
Motion: YES/NO
Liquidate: YES/NO
Best regards, and my sincere apologies,
Garrett
And then emailed March 27, 2014 12:29PM:
Quote
It is now necessary for Cognitive to pay for hosting fees directly, as opposed to me using my personal dividends to do this.
Vote "YES" for the reserve fund to cover hosting expenses from the time my personal dividends were insufficient forward.
Vote "NO" to liquidate all Cognitive mining assets and disperse via a large dividend.
Best,
Garrett
Vote "YES" for the reserve fund to cover hosting expenses from the time my personal dividends were insufficient forward.
Vote "NO" to liquidate all Cognitive mining assets and disperse via a large dividend.
Best,
Garrett
So which one is the google doc for? My votes were counted for the second one.
April 03, 2014, 10:16:41 PM
The second was started on the 27th to finish today.
Not True. Cog-PR said it had ended yesterday. I quoted him. I sold after he said it had ended and the results would be posted.
Garr clearly owes me a public apology or 25 BTC.
Garr if you pay the 25 BTC I will donated it to a charity and will make the transaction public. However I doubt you will man up and pay out.
April 03, 2014, 10:12:40 PM
I originally voted against liquidation but I am inclined to change my vote (given the recent "mathing" - which though I haven't verified, looks legit). Garr, Sam, if you have a counter-argument to "300BTC versus 50BTC", you should post it now, or expect a flood of vote changing. =/
Garrett agrees with the math. Assuming these calculations are correct, it seems that our best option is to liquidate. Garrett is going to post the current results of the motion on the Cognitive Mining website tonight.
More updates to come.
- Samuel
When this was posted I had well over 225 shares. The motion was closed. I had every reason to expect it was closed.
Actually, Goat, you make a good point with the question: When was the official end time of the motion?
It turns out, if you refer back to the official motion email:
Quote
Motion Start Date: 3-20-2014
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Therefore the entire vote tally is inaccurate, since share ownership was calculated only hours ago.
According to those dates, share ownership should have been calculated while trading on Havelock was still frozen.
IIRC, there were 2 motions.
The first was the one with the start date 20th of March.
Motion was "Liquidate YES/NO" and came back as No
The second was started on the 27th to finish today.
Motion was "Pay Hosting/Liquidate". It came back as not to liquidate.
April 03, 2014, 10:11:28 PM
So that's a yes right? I did the shareholders a service!
April 03, 2014, 10:09:50 PM
I'm kind of hard up on money right now, so if he gives you the 25BTC can I have like 5 for doing the heavy lifting?
April 03, 2014, 10:01:09 PM
I originally voted against liquidation but I am inclined to change my vote (given the recent "mathing" - which though I haven't verified, looks legit). Garr, Sam, if you have a counter-argument to "300BTC versus 50BTC", you should post it now, or expect a flood of vote changing. =/
Garrett agrees with the math. Assuming these calculations are correct, it seems that our best option is to liquidate. Garrett is going to post the current results of the motion on the Cognitive Mining website tonight.
More updates to come.
- Samuel
When this was posted I had well over 225 shares. The motion was closed. I had every reason to expect it was closed.
Actually, Goat, you make a good point with the question: When was the official end time of the motion?
It turns out, if you refer back to the official motion email:
Quote
Motion Start Date: 3-20-2014
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Motion End Date: 3-27-2014 8:00 PM PST (GMT -7)
Therefore the entire vote tally is inaccurate, since share ownership was calculated only hours ago.
According to those dates, share ownership should have been calculated while trading on Havelock was still frozen.
April 03, 2014, 09:59:09 PM
How are you going to recoup the several thousand dollars I have lost?
I am going to do the very best I can to restore Cognitive to a state where it is earning everyone money again and we are all in the positive.
Garrett, to fast track this liquidation, please initiate your operator rights to close the operation and liquidate.
You've done the math, so has everyone else. We cannot continue in your hosting facility and run a profitable operation. It is in the best interest to all shareholders to liquidate.
April 03, 2014, 09:50:24 PM
I'm a small investor but I too would like to see an end to this drama (and NOT an end to COG).
Are you serious? We will gain more by liquidating than keeping the miners and this operation running. Please see previous posts with the analysis of the math.
April 03, 2014, 09:47:49 PM
So there should be 17 units hashing?
17 x 1.6 = 27.2
Is that what you are getting at? Are the whole timeline ordeal? Possibly the combo of both?
17 x 1.6 = 27.2
Is that what you are getting at? Are the whole timeline ordeal? Possibly the combo of both?
That was as of the end of Feb. Cog was owed more than what was shipped. He should have gotten 4 to 5 more units in March like I did. CT in the end did pay out full for the hashing power and the late stuff.
I do not have tracking for the last 4 or 5 units for Garr. Ravi did not send that to me.
April 03, 2014, 09:47:26 PM
More importantly: The motion results are in.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KaaOqQg-k-C-fCkMAwKbPlxDvRBZVdwx7xZR5CbAWqk/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KaaOqQg-k-C-fCkMAwKbPlxDvRBZVdwx7xZR5CbAWqk/edit?usp=sharing
Great, we get to execute a motion on old data. I HAVE to believe with the recent developments (and assuming people can do simple math) that this CANNOT be an accurate reflection of shareholders opinions today. It makes ZERO sense to continue this operation.
April 03, 2014, 09:46:37 PM
We don't need him to say anything about you. He said he would post tracking numbers himself, as I have quoted.
April 03, 2014, 09:45:38 PM
http://oi62.tinypic.com/2e1ykwo.jpg
As you requested I removed the tracking. Fair enough.
However if you claim this is faked I hold the right, as we agreed to, to forward this e-mail to anyone who asks.
As you requested I removed the tracking. Fair enough.
However if you claim this is faked I hold the right, as we agreed to, to forward this e-mail to anyone who asks.
Without tracking I don't see what is relevant. Can you elaborate on what this picture shows?
When Garr was shipped the units from CT. As he did not want the tracking posted that is fine for privacy reasons as long as he does not say that this is fake and he admits the document is correct I will not post the tracking numbers. However if I need to prove that this is not fake I am willing to do so.
Edit: I'm only post this because I guess the document was not understandable with out the context. I really do not want to take part in this thread anymore unless you have direct questions like this to me. I'm pretty much over trying to improve Cog or get Garr to do his job.
Ok so we have proof of shipment. What we need are tracking numbers for proof of delivery. So since we have confirmation of shipment:
Tracking #?
Tracking numbers have not been released because the units have not been shipped. I will gladly post them and a confirmation from CoinTerra when they ship.
Let's see the tracking numbers.
If Garr says I am full of shit I will post the tracking numbers.
April 03, 2014, 09:44:41 PM
http://oi62.tinypic.com/2e1ykwo.jpg
As you requested I removed the tracking. Fair enough.
However if you claim this is faked I hold the right, as we agreed to, to forward this e-mail to anyone who asks.
As you requested I removed the tracking. Fair enough.
However if you claim this is faked I hold the right, as we agreed to, to forward this e-mail to anyone who asks.
Without tracking I don't see what is relevant. Can you elaborate on what this picture shows?
When Garr was shipped the units from CT. As he did not want the tracking posted that is fine for privacy reasons as long as he does not say that this is fake and he admits the document is correct I will not post the tracking numbers. However if I need to prove that this is not fake I am willing to do so.
Edit: I'm only post this because I guess the document was not understandable with out the context. I really do not want to take part in this thread anymore unless you have direct questions like this to me. I'm pretty much over trying to improve Cog or get Garr to do his job.
Ok so we have proof of shipment. What we need are tracking numbers for proof of delivery. So since we have confirmation of shipment:
Tracking #?
Tracking numbers have not been released because the units have not been shipped. I will gladly post them and a confirmation from CoinTerra when they ship.
Let's see the tracking numbers.
April 03, 2014, 09:44:19 PM
So there should be 17 units hashing?
17 x 1.6 = 27.2
Is that what you are getting at? Are the whole timeline ordeal? Possibly the combo of both?
17 x 1.6 = 27.2
Is that what you are getting at? Are the whole timeline ordeal? Possibly the combo of both?
April 03, 2014, 09:43:01 PM
I originally voted against liquidation but I am inclined to change my vote (given the recent "mathing" - which though I haven't verified, looks legit). Garr, Sam, if you have a counter-argument to "300BTC versus 50BTC", you should post it now, or expect a flood of vote changing. =/
Garrett agrees with the math. Assuming these calculations are correct, it seems that our best option is to liquidate. Garrett is going to post the current results of the motion on the Cognitive Mining website tonight.
More updates to come.
- Samuel
When this was posted I had well over 225 shares. The motion was closed. I had every reason to expect it was closed.
Jump to: