Quote from: jboogie on September 26, 2013, 02:52:34 PM

Quote from: Jay84 on September 26, 2013, 12:19:56 PM

Thanks. One more question. Don't you think, it would be much safer to run the same public asset list as BF does? Identifying just by email is pretty risky and less practicable. In case of public adress registration, issuer may pay dividends even if he is not able to identify/contact shareholder, which is great because if the shareholder does not know about havelock shut down or for whatever reason may not regularly check his email, he gets what belongs to him anyway. It could save a lot of trouble for both, shareholder and issuer. In my view, this should be standard in this industry.

not only that, but it would also guard you against your email provider suddenly closing, like it recently happened with lavabit

As a manager, this is actually a good idea. As was noted, I already have access to everyone's email address, but some of those addresses are corporate (or domain) based, some are typical yahoo/gmail, and others just seem random. If a user's email is compromised, deleted, or their access is otherwise forfeited, I'd have no other way to get in touch with them. Having the option for a user to tie a Bitcoin address they control (outside of Havelock) to their account could make life a bit easier.