Quote from: sparky999 on April 29, 2014, 01:43:14 PM

Quote from: runam0k on April 29, 2014, 12:53:00 PM

Quote from: bigasic on April 27, 2014, 05:11:51 PM

ITs only common sense to put everything on the table..

1. What is the total hashrate?
2. What is the estimated future hashrate?
3. What will this bonus be?
4. BE TRANSPARENT!

I don't mind signing a new deal if the deal makes sense.

Quote from: BKM on April 29, 2014, 03:50:23 AM

I have emailed you and you know my answer: no to the unilateral 3:1 conversion and no to the most recent proposal. I get that things need to change to stay on side of the regs but without full disclosure and a trust less process we are done.

Lab_Rat - I really hope you step up and say something well before your May 10 deadline.

Personally, I need to see two things before I can even consider agreeing to new terms (and by "new" I mean anything other than the generally accepted position prior to your purported unilateral change on 8 March).

First is an undertaking by LRM to provide, on a weekly basis, basic information regarding total hashrate, estimated future hashrate based on incoming hardware, mining proceeds, costs and any amounts set aside for reinvestment. See any of the weekly updates by peta-mine as an example of how things ought to be done - short, concise and reassuring. This is basic information that should not be difficult to provide.

Second is some additional information regarding the bonus itself. I understand what you are trying to do (whether I think it is stictly necessary, legally, is another matter). I could, possibly, get comfortable with the concept of a discretionary bonus if you at least set out what the bonus, if paid, would be based on. Even if you say, "LRM intends to pay, on a weekly basis, a bonus based on mining proceeds less costs and reinvestment, but investors should be aware that any such bonus is discretionary and the payment of a bonus one week is neither representative nor a guarantee of a bonus to be paid the following week" - this achieves exactly the same thing (ie discretionary bonus) but it is couched in slightly friendlier terms; it presents evidence of good faith and best intentions on your part. Probably not enough to rescue the share price, which is ruined, but combined with the undertaking above it would, I believe, make the decision slightly easier/less stressful for some.

Completely agree with this, if it had been worded like that then I don't think almost anyone would hv kicked up much of a fuss.

This seems reasonable. Has someone emailed LR yet about this?