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.
and addiction:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=244042.msg6201645#msg6201645(had the same situation as LRM - bitfunder failed, delays in delivery - but addiction customers love their managers because of the amount of transparency and communications)
and nastyfans:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.0(they use "donations" like LRM wants to use "bonus," but they give auditable financial data and details of their current hardware and pending orders so you can calculate what your bonus should be and that you are receiving it)
Great examples Maq..... I too would be fine with a change of some kind to the original bonds if we had a sufficient basis on which to make a decision. "Trust me" is not sufficient.