Quote from: MainstreetLP on January 19, 2017, 03:22:18 AM

Quote from: KitcatCat on January 19, 2017, 01:01:41 AM

Quote from: Authoritai on January 18, 2017, 09:42:59 PM

Quote from: tripwirearmpit on January 18, 2017, 08:00:00 PM

Quote from: coin@coin on January 16, 2017, 05:52:35 AM

Quote from: tripwirearmpit on January 16, 2017, 03:20:02 AM

Would you hire a criminal in your restaurant? And if you say yes you better be prepared to be out of business soon. Don't you think there's a reason big companies wont hire people with a criminal record? It cant be because they are stupid and dont know how to make money. Its because people who have broken the law are not to be trusted.

I would definitely hire someone who has a criminal record so long as he/she didn't physically harm or threaten another person, there are things that are rightly called criminal others that are not.
By your logic someone who goes to prison doesn't deserve to be given a second chance, that is really shortsighted and morally wrong in my opinion.

Also this case is different Charlie is not being employed by a company he's part of it so your logic fails again here.

Charlie's fault was not to have a money transmitter licence and it was made an example by Fincen at the time of his arrest, if you were around at the time you would know but I can see you are a newbie.

I would happily employ Charlie anytime because of his contacts, knowledge and experience in the bitcoin and blockchain space. He was running Bitinstant, one of the first bitcoin exchanges, he is well respected by the community and definetily not a criminal as you try to portray him. He was made a scapegoat that's all it was.

Mainstreet and Intellisys have gone to great lenghts to make sure everything on the legal side has been taken care of, I read their ITOM and company prospectus, maybe you should do the same.

My logic is not failed dude. Criminals deserve second chances and that's what welfare is for. Criminals who are involved with breaking laws especially that revolve around money should not be given a second chance by running a ico and asking for millions of dollars. If you don't get that then there's no help for you and whatever you lose you deserve to lose.

Quote from: Ellen Alemany on January 18, 2017, 08:31:58 PM

Charlies future.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Guys, jokes aside - Charlie did his time and I'm sure he wants to move on.
That being said, this project is heavily regulated - which is why US and EU and other jurisdictions are blocked from participating in the token sale.
There is alot being done on the legal side to make sure this project abides by securities laws.
Moreover, this isn't another ICO asking for millions of dollars to put into development that never ends up going anywhere.
If you take a look at the ITOM and the Prospectus, their plan is to buy American companies, and verified token holders will receive dividends/distributions.
Hope this clarifies things, and whether you chose to still question Charlie's motives because of his past, I ask you to remember that everyone makes mistakes when they're young, especially when they're the compliance officer of their own company, and doing alot of btc volume.

Just wondering, what happens if someone from the eu or us does manage to buy some. I guess then all it would take is one angry user with a vpn to make it a bad day for everyone else. Right.

And I must admit. That meme is hilarious.

Quote from: topesis on January 16, 2017, 06:08:30 AM

Any news on the ICO, the exchange/s on which the ICO will be available to buy.

The problem with some people is that they only look at the result and not the source of the prone. So you won't vote for Mandela then because we went to prison. Let's always cross check things before forming opinion on it, also remember nobody is an angel and everyone deserves second chance.

Great question - if a person from US or EU does manage to buy some after the sale then they wouldnt be able to receive the distribution (dividend).
During the token sale, only the whitelisted addresses will be able to purchase tokens - this means anyone buying MIT tokens have to go through the exchanges and must have a verified account, so even if you are using a VPN (which I'm using generally for all my interneting) then you would have to be able to prove the address you're putting forward.

But let's say someone with duel Mexican/US citizenship did manage to buy some and then complain, and Im talking about buying some directly from the sale. How would that work?