GLBSE IS APPARENTLY CLOSING https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.0

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nefario taking users deposits... well apparently it's not confirmed and pure speculation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Quote from: theymos on October 06, 2012, 12:00:57 AM

GLBSE user funds are more or less safe, but I have bad news from the GLBSE shareholder meeting.

Nefario has, without a shareholder motion and in violation of the bylaws and GLBSE ToS, decided to close down GLBSE. Users will be able to collect deposits only after submitting identity info. A similar system to the one that Goat was forced to use will be provided so that assets can be traded elsewhere.

He is also illegally using user deposits to pay for his lawyer. If he continues, the GLBSE cash reserves (which I manage) will not be enough to cover costs and GLBSE will be in debt to users.

I'm very sorry about this, but those shareholders who are sane are helpless against Nefario and the insane shareholders who for some mind-boggling reason think that closing down GLBSE in this way will help both themselves and GLBSE users.

Since Nefario refuses to give complete details about his legal concerns and he has been acting strangely, I feel that it is somewhat possible that Nefario is working under some sort of plea bargain and is gathering IDs for future prosecution.

Nefario has defrauded me and others in several different ways and deserves a scammer tag.
- The BitcoinGlobal bylaws state that BitcoinGlobal's purpose is to operate GLBSE. By shutting down GLBSE without amending the bylaws, Nefario has violated the bylaws.
- He has stated that he would ignore any motion to remove him as CEO.
- He is knowingly making BitcoinGlobal shares worthless, violating his fiduciary duty.
- He is refusing to release my GLBSE balance without my ID, which I did not agree to.

Since my GLBSE shares are now worthless, it should be obvious that I had no knowledge of this before now.

I urge everyone to never work with Nefario again. A Bitcoin stock exchange is a good idea, though. I hope that someone will create something better than GLBSE and MPEx.

Quote from: theymos on October 06, 2012, 04:42:10 AM

Quote from: repentance on October 06, 2012, 04:25:09 AM

Could you clarify this a bit please theymos. How did he have access to the user deposits? If he was "borrowing" them without authorisation, that's straight up embezzlement regardless of whether he intended to return them at a later time. When did the shareholders become aware that he was spending user deposits and how did you become aware of his intention to replace them with money from BitcoinGlobal? I'm confused about whether the shareholders effectively authorised him taking a "loan" from the business post hoc by agreeing that he would pay back the misappropriated funds from BG money.

I hate to say it, but if you send Nefario user funds knowing full well that he has already misappropriated funds, you're laying yourself wide open to liability. His access to funds needs to be blocked and a way of returning user deposits worked out which doesn't involve Nefario.

Nefario has always held onto most of the user funds so he could top up the hot wallet when necessary. Exactly what funds I should hold was never clearly-defined. I ended up holding all BitcoinGlobal cash on hand plus some of the user funds for when Nefario was away and the hot wallet needed to be refilled.

I assume he's spending user deposits. Maybe he's using his own money, but I don't think he has enough to cover lawyer fees. He said in the meeting that he wants BitcoinGlobal to pay for the lawyer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TYGGR Delisting
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Quote from: Namworld on October 05, 2012, 11:51:52 PM

Actual stock exchanges that are regulated can delist stocks for a variety of reasons (inluding no longer meeting listing requirements) and are not obligated to protect it's value. The company behind the stocks are ultimately responsible for managing the security, with or without a stock market to trade on. To defraud would have required Nefario to steal those customers funds and run with them.

Fraud is committed on major stock exchanges and those stock exchange can delist stocks no longer fitting the requirements. They are not normally held responsible for that however, they are simply a medium for company and investors to trade assets. That an asset gets delisted does not prevent it's trade over-the-counter between whoever is willing to trade the assets or the company to pay the shareholders.

I can only agree to the fact that the delisting was rashly and poorly executed, definitely in an attempt to sanction Chaang. I can also agree that the delisting method provided for proof of ownership is poorly adequate. An alternative should probably be worked out between Nefario and Chaang on the delisting.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DMC suspension
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DMC was suspended, unlike many other assets who are not suspended until the owner runs away, because it went down to 0.011 BTC/share trading value. That's 1% of IPO price, something unseen before for an asset with the issuer still active. Diablo-D3 was reinstated as manager after a motion by shareholders passed. An audit was planned and said to be in progress but no further news were given on that matter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nefario's scam accusations
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quoted from "Scammer tag: Nefario." thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114442.0

Quote from: Namworld on October 05, 2012, 04:03:52 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 01, 2012, 12:30:16 AM

I.a. On September 10 he blocked the accounts of DMC, on the grounds that gross negligence possibly amounting to fraud on the part of the asset holder was being alleged in forum threads.

The asset started from an IPO of 1 BTC and ended up trading at 0.011 BTC each, something unseen before. Diablo-D3 was frequently doing DMC to other assets trade-in under the current NAV to entice trades. Each time pushing value down.

Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 01, 2012, 12:30:16 AM

I.b. Subsequently he refused to release a list of shareholders on the rationale that it'd be a breach of their privacy rights.

I.c. He also declared an audit will be held but later refused to release the name of the auditor.

I.d. The accounts were later unblocked without any audit being performed, and without any material changes in the alleged facts.

The accounts were unblocked because a motion was accepted, asking shareholders if they wanted to keep Diablo-D3 as the manager.

Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 01, 2012, 12:30:16 AM

II.a. On September 25 he unlisted all of goat's assets, vaguely alleging some sort of malfeasance which was never either explained or documented --it may or may not have to do with goat's refusal to sell back some illegitimate shares created on GLBSE by an unauthorized entity which nevertheless were legitimized by Nefario's own declaration but which was quashed by the actual legitimate owners of GLBSE.

II.b. In contradiction to the claims made with I.b. above, Nefario claims to have issued the list of shareholders to Goat and that all obligations remaining exclude GLBSE, and should be handled between goat and investors alone.

Yes, we all agree it was a very rash and expeditive process which could have been planned more thoroughly, with proper delays. It would also be good to provide a more secure method of transferring codes to Goat. Preferably directly get a BTC address from holders that they can submit to GLBSE who can then send the list to goat. goat's shareholders could then communicate with him and sign with their BTC address. Or any other proper method which would have given enough prior notice and would have these things sorted out before the actual delisting of said assets.

Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 01, 2012, 12:30:16 AM

III.a. Starting at least as early as September 10 the assets controlled by Usagi (CPA, NYAN.x, BMF) were being scrutinized publicly on this forum for gross negligence possibly amounting to fraud on the part of the asset holder, in the same manner and to an extent equal or greater to that of I.a. above.

III.b. In spite of III.a. Nefario declared Usagi as the head of the ad-hoc commission that was to review GLBSE assets for inclusion in blue/white categories.

III.c. In spite of III.a. and contrary to his conduct in I.a. and II above, Nefario failed to lock the assets controlled by Usagi.

Yes, Usagi's funds were invested in many assets which loss value, especially mining (the whole mining market crashed overall). There has been a subsequent large drop of value in his funds NAV. Some people requested investigation as to if there was negligence/scam on Usagi's part. Nothing was proven so far, other than the selected assets invested in by Usagi's funds might not have been the best. It was however, unlike in DMC's case, a loss in % which was following the loss made by the mining assets Usagi's funds were supposed to be invested into.

As for the part III.b, Nefario never made Usagi the head of a commission to review GLBSE assets to be included or gave him any decisive power. Usagi simply took the initiative to gather issuers/large investors to include in a group to review assets. Nefario refused to give them any decisive power however. He was simply taking feedback and suggestions from them regarding listings and other things since they were already heavy GLBSE users.

Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 01, 2012, 12:30:16 AM

For these reasons Nefario should wear the scammer tag unless or until:

A. He personally refunds all investors in any and all Usagi funds to the value of their original investment or

B. He personally refunds all investors in DMC and TYGR-* to the value of their original investment.

tl;dr: You can't have your cake and eat it too, and you can't run away and hide for a couple weeks until people forget. It worked with LIF.x, it worked with the numerous other scams hosted by GLBSE, but it has to end sometime.

According to your claims it does not seem you are accusing Nefario of scamming or defrauding anyone. It seems you are accusing him of being incompetent.