Quote from: theymos on November 24, 2012, 08:53:24 PM

I've decided that gigavps will not get a scammer tag for this. Nefario has proven himself to be untrustworthy, so it would be unreasonable for gigavps to pay out large sums of money based entirely on Nefario's list. Requiring affidavits and proofs of identity are reasonable precautions. It's impossible to strictly follow the contract in a safe way.

On what basis did you conclude that it wasn't unreasonable for gigavps to make agreements as a private individual and now attempt to alter history (and limit his own liability) by falsely claiming that those agreements were made with an LLC? This is about the only issue on which I believe it likely giga deserves a scammer tag right now.

Do you believe it reasonable that someone holding say 1 giga share who doesn't live in the US is now expected to pay probably $50-$100 in fees to satisfy giga's requirements and obtain back their <1 BTC worth of assets? Or is it reasonable that they should just give up on their claim "because nefario"?

I could partially understand giga's position if the requirements for ID etc were applied only to investors who EITHER:

a) Had large holdings,
OR
b) Didn't have details in the list provided by nefario.

But requesting it from all? Is that really reasonable?

Next: let's imagine I submit a claim (with all the relevant documents) - I'm either on the list or I'm not. Now what? Is my claim approved regardless? If so - then it's a scammer's charter as there's no likely means by which it could ever be proven that I DIDN'T own the shares.

Or is my some other basis used to determine whether the claim is approved? If so - what value is the ID actually adding to the process? There's nothing it can be compared against. Sure - in theory it allows recourse against me - but that's a theory that could almost certainly never be put into practice (how to prove I didn't believe I owned shares).

This approach WILL totally deter small scammers - and equally totally make it impractical for smaller investors to reclaim their assets. It's a minor to middling inconvenience for large investors - and a huge bonus for any big scammers, as it adds a negligible amount of risk whilst giving a greatly improved chance of them actually getting something.

If the argument gos along the lines of "well we won't pay out big claims until nefario's confirmed their details" then what's the point of requesting ID from anyone not on the list? Surely they should just be told to contact nefario and get themselves on the next updated list - and the ID becomes irrelevant as the list is (essentially) being relied on.

For the record I'm not submitting a claim and am 99.99% sure I didn't hold any giga when GLBSE closed (the .001% is the chance that other assets sold and a buy order for giga filled in the last 10 minutes of trading, but I don't believe I even had a giga buy order up).