Topic: TYGRR.* assets on GLBSE delisted. - page 11. (Read 33293 times)

First of all, I have the utmost respect for Nefario. But I must say that your defense isn't helping. I wish he got into this dialogue and ignored the trolls. Unfortunately he's done exactly the opposite.

Also, I think you are looking it the wrong way. As a customer, I see a situation where things could have been handled much much better with just an ounce of professionalism. I have the right to complain. The idea of codes may or may not work, we don't know. I didn't ask to be handed the responsibility to judge whether an ad-hoc invention will work in this case. Did we really really need to be in this situation? I can imagine countless ways that GLBSE could have avoided putting us in this mess, so why did it?

Anyway, let me walk you through the thread.

• I have the code, I'm already wasting my time, I'm not receiving any dividends, I can't sell my shares, so regardless of whose fault it is, there is a problem. First acknowledge that.
• Second, there were zero number of reasons to abruptly delist this asset. If you really think there is, please list them.
• Purely because this asset is delisted without notice, I can't get rid of them. The codes don't have the property of being transferred, so I'm in this nasty situation where I have the incentive to waste my time arguing here.
• However, purely because this asset is delisted without notice, I can't get more of them to make this worth the effort.
• Therefore I have suffered because of GLBSE's decision. They could have easily prevented this, which is a very legitimate accusation from me as a customer. If you think they couldn't have handled it better, please explain.
• If you read the comments in this thread, people are suggesting that these codes can be sold. Some people will "buy" these codes. Can you see the scale of trouble everyone will get into when this inevitably happens? I think you are mostly reciting from memory. I humbly suggest you to read the comments more carefully and understand why this is different from the situations you know about.
• GLBSE declared "in effect" that it won't consider itself responsible for any of the trouble that's at least initiated by their own actions.

Now, regarding GLBSE's role, you are, for some reason, ignoring what I said about the nature of the codes and the nature of a signed contract.


I am quite capable of comprehending the fact that GLBSE declared that it doesn't have an obligation to trade these shares anymore. I don't know how this is related to what I said though. Do they have the right to do that? Sure. Do they have the right to terminate every single asset tomorrow morning? Sure. Do these facts make them a pain in my ass? Definitely.

Nah, I don't have a large exposure anywhere. My BTC wealth isn't large enough to even be considered "meager" with the low hashrate I have, but that also means, that I can't just simply write things off as easily as others that do have large exposures.

I had more exposure with the pirate fiasco that I ended up getting hurt on a lot, but you didn't see me going off half-cocked about it. I rolled the dice, I lost, so be it.

I just hate all this fake controversy BS. People spouting out stuff as if they know what the F they're talking about when they don't, and don't even know enough to recognize that they don't know.

This escalation to make a big public spectacle of the whole thing, originated with Goat, from everything I understand, and after seeing his behavior over other issues, like a MtGox one a while back, he just isn't stable.

The only thing to gain by escalating it with this tantrum of his has the only purpose of trying to bring down GLBSE and Nefario. Any honest disagreement they had has been lost a long time ago by now. It just sickens me that supposedly intelligent people keep acting this way without the apparent ability to apply reason and logic.

I mean, seriously... OMFG!!! WHAT DO I DO IF SOMEONE USES A CODE TWICE!!? Figure it out... you don't have mommy around here to save you.

WHAT IF THE LIST ISN'T ACCURATE!!!... well, when you actually have some evidence of it not being accurate, then you have something to discuss, which can be verified by Nefario's last records if there is a dispute, but if yer not even going to bother trying to match the claim ID's to the asset-holders who present them, you don't have a leg to stand on. Any failure is on your shoulders if you can't be bothered to try to make good with your asset-holders.

BUT NEFARIO IS HOLDING MY BTC SO I CAN'T PAY ANYBODY!!!... the sooner you give him a BTC addy to send your balance to, the sooner you have them. this is a problem of your own making, man up, shut the F up, and give him an address to send your coin to, the only one preventing it is Goat himself.

Come on! Are the rest of you really so damned stupid that you keep falling for all of the BS that keeps getting posted? Are so many of you honestly so incapable of spotting BS and calling people on it when you see it?

Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK people...

Grow up.

-- Smoov

So this is more about revenge on Mircea Popescu than actually adding to this discussion?  Carry-on I guess??? 

I just hope you realize we have a real important issue here with one of our exchanges and a large bond issuer and investors need to understand what the rules to this game are so we don't take on more risk that we calculated in the first place minus any Force majeure.

The pedophile Mircea Popescu comes in every thread trowing garbage around. I will do the same for him. The difference is that, all I say about him is true.

Why do we keep resulting to personal character assassinations?   I get, you don't agree with their personal decisions, I don't either.  We should stick to the topic at hand and YOU should make another thread in "Off-topic" to discuss that users personal choices.



Smoovious  - What is your angle?  You are really vocal on this issue and really going after Goat.  Do you have a large exposure on GBLSE that this conversation is affect its value because customers of this exchange are vocalizing their dis-satisfaction with the policies and actions in a public forum?

Nefario - Will you please release your official statement on why Goat is a liability to "your" exchange?  We need to put this issue to rest because at this point, it looks like you did this because of a PERSONAL issue with Goat and not because he violated your TOS.   Your silence on this issue really makes people start to think that Maybe Goat has a point regardless if you like him as a person and a user on this forum.

Kindly,
D

Nefario's actions seem consistent with the following assumptions:

1) All fraudulent assets pose an imminent legal threat to the existence of the exchange (accomplice/accessory).
2) The distance between the accomplices/accessories and the exchange is too great for negotiation to be valuable.

Why does GLBSE has the authority to do whatever it wants? It's the only authority at GLBSE.  Seems they've simply taken a position in these matters (all moral and ethical determinations aside).

MPOE-PR has it exactly right though, contract law requires the acceptance of an offer between an offerer and an offeree where both are legal entities.  When one of the parties is unknown, contract law cant really apply.  (i.e. how to you prove the competency of an unknown party? what kind of representations can an unknown party make?)

That is the real problem with the claim codes.  They must tie back to the authentication process in GLBSE to "identify" their corresponding "unknown" owner.  (Hence the key setup at MPEx).

As to the fake GLBSE shares, a mistake is a valid reason for a court to dismiss an agreement.  If you take the position that there was a binding agreement on the fake GLBSE shares, then there is still a high chance that the agreement is unenforceable. (i.e. you can't say assets

IANAL.

What a bad image is all this giving to bitcoin.

The guy who owns GLBSE, just after Goat claims that GLBSE is a scam he just delist his bonds.

Doing that is not really mature as GLBSE is fundamental for bitcoin having a value, and you're just eliminating the bonds from one of the biggest guy in the bitcoin world when it comes to bonds.

I cannot heed your advice. If I am incorrect, I can't just let myself stay that way. My devotion to truth and honesty will not allow it. I'm not trolling. I genuinely and honestly believe everything I've said.

And, in fact, in a few places where you have shown that I'm incorrect, I've abandoned those claims or acknowledged that you are correct. I can dig out the quotes if you don't believe me. If you feel like you nailed me on something and I just moved onto something else, you're probably right. There's not much point in focusing on something we agree on. I'll try to make a greater effort in the future to leave something you said that I agree with in and respond, "I agree" or something like that, rather than just cutting it because I agree with it.

If I'm wrong or ignorant, why would I just want to move on and stay that way? Are you saying I'm not capable of understanding these complex concepts?

When people disagree with you, particularly passionately, it is very easy to assume bad faith on their part. After all, you're pretty sure you're right. And your arguments seem convincing to you. I can tell you from many years of experience, people who conclude that others are paid shills or arguing in bad faith are almost always wrong. (The other people may be idiots, but even that's not the same thing.)

A pedophile like Mircea Popescu, knows everything about anything.

Sadly you're not talking to people who understand what those words mean.

So the alternative to what I suggested is what? Do absolutely nothing? Seems to be working out al right for you up to this point.

Alright, look... I'm completely serious here, no joke...

You seriously need to learn what you're talking about, because you're just talking out of your ass.

Do yourself a favor and instead of your continued trolling, do something to actually learn something about what stocks and bonds are.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and you keep showing a pretty clear unwillingness to even learn about how things are actually done in the real world here.

Honest advice here, please heed it.

-- Smoov

It does, doesn't it. The same sort of ill-baked McGuyvering.

So let this be a warning to all GLBSE customers -- if GLBSE decides to delist any asset you hold, they believe they have no further obligation to track the ownership of that asset. And they are the only entity that *ever* had any such obligation. So if they delist, nobody has any obligation to track your ownership of the asset, unless the asset contract says otherwise.

Sorry, when did Goat agree to redeem the equivalent of bearer bonds? Bearer bonds have higher risks than listed securities, and I don't believe Goat ever contracted to assume that risk. GLBSE isn't assuming it, right?

Who gave GLBSE the authority to turn Goat's listed security into the functional equivalent of a bearer bond?

He's giving you perfectly sensible and logical advice, Goat. Seriously, if you're going to continue to be involved in financial dealings, you're going to have to do better than you've been doing.

Nobody wants to financially back someone apparently incapable of working out things for himself.

Quit being an ass.

-- Smoov

I read through your posts.  You are user from a different account.  Your knowledge is well above a user with 26 post.   I call puppet.

The contract  between you and Goat was in effect at the time you purchased the shares from Goat. You didn't buy them from GLBSE, and you didn't enter into a contract with GLBSE. The contract listed on the info page for that issue, wasn't between Goat and GLBSE, and it wasn't between GLBSE and you, it was between Goat and you.

The only purpose of the code, is so Goat can match up on his list, who owns what. GLBSE operated by keeping asset-holder's identities anonymous.

You're imagining a problem that simply doesn't exist.GLBSE's obligation of handling the shares I own. The claim code I got doesn't have identical qualities with the representation of shares I owned through GLBSE. Even the potential existence and nature of these codes were unknown prior to this event, probably even by GLBSE.

Never mind that I was exposed to a situation that I had no way of predicting. It is GLBSE's obligation to keep me out of needless trouble. I'm still waiting for an explanation of why these assets were de-listed without prior notice to me. You can argue that the de-listing is Goat's fault, but the fact that I'm wasting time here instead of productive work and the risk that I won't be able to redeem my shares is entirely GLBSE's doing.