|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 15:30:00 -
[1]
Quote: We would like to take this opportunity to state that the current Board is in no way responsible for the financial position the bank finds itself in. Those remaining on the Board have had their roles and activities under the previous management thoroughly reviewed and have been cleared in full of any wrong doing.
Can we get more information around this piece, or consolidate the conclusions? Bits of information have been scattered across many threads. In ebank customers really don't have a say in who is running this show. However, ebank employees' involvement in other projects and future launches could be suspect without a very clear picture of their innocence in this matter.
My point of view is that the order of blame looks something like this:
[Tier 1]First, there are the theives/issuers of defaulted loans which may be called out. These are the folks that directly lost customer's money, and in most cases profited from it.
[Tier 2]Once this isk is accounted for (not necessarily recovered, but at least the gap explained) - what is left? Here there is an opportunity for senior management to step up and take accountability for losing the remaining funds. Senior management/BoD members may not have been directly responsible for losing the funds, but had the most say in placing those thieves in their positions without enough oversight to stop/contain them.
[Tier 3]Finally, if there are remaining unaccounted funds that no one is willing to be responsible for, responsibility should be shared by all involved parties. Obviously this is not the same as someone stealing the money, but they are still tainted by the fiasco.
Now - it would be ideal that all funds could be accounted in tier 1 - that is that ebank could identify at least where every missing penny went, and who authorized or left the barn door open to allow it to happen. It would be acceptable if we had more folks like Hexxx that stood up and took blame for what happened. It would be a shame to see all of ebank's former employees, many who really are innocent of any wrongdoing, misconduct or irresponsibility, to be tainted by their involvement with the bank.
Ideally, I would like to see an itemized list by who would fall in each category, and what isk they would be accountable for in that category.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 15:49:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Lubomir Penev
Originally by: Ray McCormack The Limited API Key requirement is not negotiable, we will not use alternative methods to verify your account status. Failure to provide your Limited API Key will result in your ISK remaining in your Suspense Account for the next few months until it is considered dormant and written off (pending final decisions on that process). I want to make it abundantly clear that we will not change our stance on this.
I will reply to the other questions and suggestions later this evening.
Ah, you're entering the intel selling business then? If not why do you want to gather so much information?
That's my takeaway too. Classic EVEconomics: whoever's holding the isk gets to make the rules.
This feels like a scam: you're ransoming your customers for information with their account balances they trusted you with. I don't think the onus is on the customer to prove anything, at this point.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 15:57:00 -
[3]
Quote: Every time we collect 1 user with 1 ISK that was banned, verified by API, that's 1 ISK is removed from the deficit.
This doesn't make sense. If your bank is holding assets associated with RMT, are those assets not liable to be wiped out? Do you have a clear record how much isk was lost by either Ricdic's character or GMs zapping isk? What gives you confidence that further ISK won't be zapped?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 17:58:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Liberty Eternal If this is an anti-crime operation, then you must commit yourself to cleaning up accounts as quickly as possible, and then you must return account holdings to their rightful owners and only retain isk through mutual, voluntary agreement.
The issue is if we don't enforce the policy across the board then we lose the opportunity to catch those we're after, and we cannot be sure we have caught them all until every account holder supplies their Limited API Key or forfeits their accounts. If they do supply their Limited API Key, then they have accepted the contractual change, albeit under duress. However then they are then able to register their dissatisfaction with that change by withdrawing the ISK from their account or changing their Limited API Key (and only giving it to us once every few months to ensure their account remains active if they merely distrust us).
Why is the ebank customer being held to this higher standard of trust/disclosure than the ebank board? Where are YOUR limited API keys?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 18:28:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Dzil Why is the ebank customer being held to this higher standard of trust/disclosure than the ebank board? Where are YOUR limited API keys?
You surely don't expect us to make them public do you? That's hardly the same thing as we're requesting.
Its exactly what you're requesting. Making them available to even one potential scammer might as well be making them public, right? How are you prepared to assure 9000 API keyholders that your current and future staff harbors no scammers, in light of this past year? Even FX900 broke a contract when he felt morally obligated.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 18:38:00 -
[6]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: RAW23
You make them public, obviously. Your argument is that they contain no information that could really be damaging if given to strangers (that is, the staff of Ebank). That being so, there is no danger to you in making yours public.
Making information public and giving it to EBANK worlds apart.
You must be thinking of the reputation ebank held before it scammed a couple trillion isk and froze everyone's accounts. Let me bring you up to this year:
Ricdic Mr. Horizontal Hexxx
These three all would have had access to customers public API keys in the scenario you outline above.
Therefore, I've chosen my trusted list of auditors. Any one of them is welcome to check your bank staff's API keys. I eagerly await the results.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 20:16:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Dumb Jerk Torn, perhaps there's a D and E. It would be an excellent way to:
D. Discourage investors from reclaiming their ISK if they have other alts on the account they feel the need to keep secret.
E. Find out who some of the alts are that've been giving them so much grief on the forums. (I'm sure you'd love to know some too. )
I think the more relevant critique of the API requirement is that any thief/scammer worth his salt keeps his scam characters on a different account.
This. And even if they didn't, it's 15 bucks to do a character transfer, right? So anyone with more than a PLEX's worth of ISK owed to ebank is going to cap their losses at 300 mil and recover the debt.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 21:08:00 -
[8]
No matter how Ebank tries to spin it, by writing off accounts that refuse to provide it with their limited API key, ebank will NOT achieve its stated goal of returning customers account balances in full.
What's the difference between returning 50% to all customers, or 100% to half of your customers?
It just becomes a selective scam at that point, instead of a failed business. You're selecting to return money only to those that vouch faith for you. Sound familiar? It should: that's the exact play LRN/YGR used. Anyone here look back on that business thinking they should invest again?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 21:18:00 -
[9]
We had that in the other thread, before it became a haiku contest. Flamewarrior I believe. It really didn't improve the thread quality, iirc.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 21:48:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Wyehr
Wait. What?
So, I give you the API key for my banned RMT alt account, and then you cancel all transfers from that account to other active accounts?
Anyone see the problem(s) here?
Heh, I like the way you think.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
|
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 22:23:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Giz S FOR EVERYONE WORRIED ABOUT GIVING OUT YOUR LIMITED API KEY
You can submit your limited api key to EBANK, then just request a new limited api from CCP once the ebank api has been validated. this way, they dont get to store all your information in the future if they dont already do it once they get it initially.
I want to hire this guy as a security consultant.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 22:29:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Leneerra Edited by: Leneerra on 23/11/2009 22:21:10 And what if someone is under a temp ban for rude language? does that mean he forfeits his ebank balance?
I will ask what chribba would ask for an audit to veryfy none of my alts have any delings with you. that way we perhaps have an accepteble option for those that are unwilling to provide you with an api key. checking 2 names against a list of 9000 should not be too expensive and you can even add a surcharge for using this liquidation option
But even if that was an accepteble option. You are not keeping a list of verified withdrawal/liquidation requests. So I still would have no indication when i'd get my isk. Will you change your liquidation policy in this and provide your customers with with a reasonable option to liquidate in an honest fasion that does not require them to be able to respond within 5 minutes of you guys posting a surplus on your 700b limit?
edit: sorry do not know the auditor you mentioned sencnes
Don't know that guy either - probably just as he isn't loud on the forums ;)
The liquidation policy itself creates the issue of ebank's BoD potentially lining up for withdrawl requests just before the announcement release. I doubt they would do that (probably having way too much fun making everyone elses isk back to worry about their own, atm) - but nonetheless a guarantee against insider trading (or withdrawing in this case) would be nice.
Don't know why you're hiring an ethics officer - this board will happily tell you if you're doing anything that could be construed as unethical :P
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 23:29:00 -
[13]
Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: EvilweaselSA its amazing to me you guys strung them along this long
this isn't even trying man, you wouldn't last a day in the goonswarm scamming legion
Well, I wouldn't join the scamming legion in the first place, the path of honesty and a good reputation is lined with ISK.
There is no string here, if people just hold out, eventually they'll get their ISK back, it doesn't mean much I know but hey, that's what the intention is.
That sorta contradicts your statement on API keys. What happens to your customers that are unable to entrust you with their keys?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 23:53:00 -
[14]
Question - what would be ebank's position if I offer a service to anonymously take characters on to a second account, validate them with my API, and transfer them back?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 15:44:00 -
[15]
Originally by: TornSoul It all boils down to this
- Retroactively demanding API keys, simply isn't acceptable.
Whatever the intentions, good or bad, whatever the justifications, whatever the percieved "overall benefit", the above statement is fact.
It's really that simple.
It's more of a pick two:
API Keys/Keeping the Ebank name/Not scamming
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 15:53:00 -
[16]
Originally by: SencneS Consolidated replies.
rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble
That toll is your limited API.
Spoken like a true pirate. This post really belongs in C&P at this point.
Charging someone to return assets you siezed is criminal. Whether that charge is in isk, information, or unreasonable labor.
You do bring out one good point though: sharing your API doesn't justify this action. It lubes it up a bit at least, but it's still violating.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 17:33:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Ray McCormack But I don't think the argument here is over trust.
No, I'm pretty certain the argument over the past 10-11 pages is in fact, over trust.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 18:24:00 -
[18]
That's a fun catch 22. You need information on how many legit accounts you will payout under the new policy before you can offer any promises of withdrawls. Customers with corp alts/supercap holders/whatever other dirty secrets need those ETAs and estimate early withdrawl %s to determine whether it's financially worth transferring the character off the account to recover the isk in a bank balance.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 18:56:00 -
[19]
Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Kalrand I think you are quite wrong about this.
Small problem is we'll never know, but given the level of hostility people throw at EBANK, I would have taken a bet that if we had lead with that first it would have been 11 pages of whines and trolls as well. That post I just made wouldn't be that it would be "We could have asked for Limited API, but I'm sure everyone would feel that was too much as well!"
You see the problem. I admit 0.10 ISK is not much, but in a crowd of people all hanging out to slam EBANK against the wall, even the littlest pebble of information is all that is needed to warrant a flame suit :)
Would it be that difficult to simply offer the choice? .10 isk, or your public API key?
I mean hell, .10 ISK times 9000 accounts is 900 isk: I'll finance it. No no, keep your wallets in your pants guys, I got this.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 20:35:00 -
[20]
Originally by: SentryRaven *eats some popcorn*
So after 12 pages, people are still debating over something that is not negotiable? Respect....
Really at the point ebank has a client's money in an uncollateralized contract, nothing is negotiable.
I hope future clients remember that.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
|
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 13:54:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Kapila Parthalan I would very much appreciate if you told us what makes you so convinced that this is the best decision. Your arguments so far are unsatisfactory.
The reasons already stated are what have convinced me. If those don't satisfy you then we'll need to agree to disagree, I can't exactly invent reasons to satisfy you and it's not my responsibility to satisfactorily justify each and every bank decision to every single customer.
Perhaps these reasons could be better framed around the priorities of the bank. It's a hard pill to swallow that after freezing accounts for this long and keeping a hard stance on returning accounts to full liquidity, that ebank is now of the position that it is acceptable to default some of its debts as collateral damage in a witch hunt.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:08:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Dzil on 25/11/2009 15:08:51
Originally by: cosmoray Now that EBANK had decided to require API keys to maintain your bank account, I have a question:
HOW DOES EBANK INTEND TO COMMUNICATE THIS TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT READ MD FORUM?
I'm confident the remaining denizens of the internet can find a picture of the middle finger extended without reading MD.
Edit - damn you Cosmo and your spacing schemes...
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:32:00 -
[23]
Ron Paul was a candidate for the USA presidential election in 2008. Without derailing ebanks thread (in due time folks, in due time) - a lot of his supporters became overnight political critics because they read something on the internet.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:39:00 -
[24]
Quote: Account Sales * Account Sales will occur through the Account2Player Transfer interface (see the Move Money menu on the EBANK website). This is to avoid additional coding changes. All sales will need to be verified and registered with the Bank, no sales may occur without this verification. A verification fee of 5% will be levied against the sale, and is payable by the seller. Should the buyer wish to refund the fee, that is their decision and the bank cannot be held liable for them breaking this agreement. * This does mean that legitimate A2P transfers will have the same fee levied, unfortunately this fee is non-refundable and our suggestion to you is to wait until the sales fee is no longer applicable and is returned to the standard 0.5%. No discussion will be entered into, do not use this service if you don't want to pay the 5% fee.
Is there a minimum balance?
Will this 5% fee also apply if you are moving balances between your own known characters on the same account, which ebank is requiring you to register?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 16:07:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Kalrand
Originally by: Dasola And still no published BoD apikeys so we could confirm that they have no scam alts, goons, ebank loan defaults, etc...
Whats wrong with goons?
I'm not sure why it matters at this point. Suppose you see a goon, old enemy, or someone you have a hidden vendetta against. What are you going to do? Request your money back?
Ebank's position is clear: /finger. Don't forget it.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 18:39:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Claire Voyant The whole idea that people would steal hundreds of billions of isk from EBank and then turn around and deposit the money back into the bank through their alt because it is obviously such a great investment is patently absurd on the face of it.
Well no, to be fair the scheme would look more akin to Mr. H or an equivalent director gone bad creating false accounts with isk that was never deposited, then collecting off them in a distributed, less likely to be noted fashion as ebank supposedly generates profits.
One of the negative side effects of this method is ebank will never know what portion of those funds was truly fabricated, and what was stolen from its clients. I guess maybe that makes it easier.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 19:17:00 -
[27]
Aye, it's just a game. And this is just a forum talking about said game. While people may sound a bit worked up here - I wouldn't characterize posting about a topic on the internet as going too far. Just as it's just a game, it's also just a forum.
The trolls criticizing the whiners for whining are of course recursively whining about the whining.
It can be fun to draw comparisons between the emergent behaviors in EVE and real life. I like to discuss these things even without a penny vested in ebank.
As to the rest: I'm in the court now that ebank has stolen all your isk. If, when, how and on what terms they give it back will never change that fact.
Till the next announcement/haiku thread, Dzil
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 08:26:00 -
[28]
Quote: As to your invitation to join your organisation, I am apprehensive. No for the amount of work, but for the ethical implications of being part of your organisation. It may come as a shock to you, but from a critical customers viewpoint some of your actions seem wildy unapropriate, especially in light of the type of organisation you claim to be.
I would have similar concerns. The only people that would app for a position at ebank at this point are those either too morally empty to care ebank scammed its customers, or too stupid to see it. The good news, Ray, is there's definitely hope for a large organization of mindless crooks with a few brilliant sociopaths at the top: just ask goonswarm.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 18:05:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Breaker77 I think he is asking that if he knew of someone that owed EBank ISK (loan, ect...) what information would the BoD at EBank reveal to get it paid back (API, ect...).
I guess I'm being stupid, but I still don't understand the question?
If I understand correctly, it looks like he's asking whether ebank would give out information on its characters/accounts in order to collect on a loan.
I would assume the answer is yes... otherwise it seems silly to hold any of your debtors in contempt or default when you have failed to offer them your limited API keys to prove you aren't scammers.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Waffle Investment Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 18:25:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Dzil If I understand correctly, it looks like he's asking whether ebank would give out information on its characters/accounts in order to collect on a loan.
Give out information on who's characters/accounts?
This isn't being asked very succinctly in my mind. Spell it out for me, draw pictures.
Do you prefer PPT or MS paint?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
|
Dzil
Caldari RED DESCENT
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 07:16:00 -
[31]
Originally by: SencneS
I can attest to this 100% :)
To everyone else, you know what I don't look for prise or anything, I've known for a long time that a public business is a thankless job. Set by the public who have high expectation to please them, and zero tolerance for anything outside those expectations. This whole page started out because I mixed a thank you to TS with a personal disguised statement about the rest of MD. If that doesn't say something about MD's issues, then I don't know of a more plain in your face example of why I have that opinion.
Enlightenment about the type of people you deal with is both a curse and a reward. The reward is clarity, and freedom from frustration. The curse is, that enlightenment may be the single biggest disappointment imaginable.
However, AC155 makes a great point, enough about my public outcry for pure disgust in MD's self debilitating capacity. Back to EBANK. Enjoy!
Ebank's dead and a scam. Not much left to talk about till you open up partial withdrawls to the customers that agreed to your new BOHICA policy.
For what it's worth RAW23, I completely agree with you - Sencnes' attack on MD for not inventing a solution to a problem they created, and their chair characterized as non-negotiable, was completely absurd. The follow up ad hominem attacks are typical of a scammer grasping for any kind of face saving argument and too proud to apologize to those he/she so dispises. The only reason to continue to press the point is there are some in MD so completely bat**** blind that even this glaring neon sign won't deter them from continuing to funnel their isk down a toilet.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari RED DESCENT
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 13:00:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Kalrand
For what its worth, I think sucking at PR is a prerequisite for being on your payroll.
I believe they found everyone with a silver tongue either negligent or embezzling funds.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.12.16 22:43:00 -
[33]
Quote: Better to be a failed business that pays out what it can and moves on than a corrupt business that scams its investors out of promised profits.
That's fair. I stand by they owe back not only principle+interest, but they should be held to pay back all investors and not just those providing API details. If they can prove someone has scammed the bank and based on that doesn't want to pay them back, that's reasonable. Putting the onus on the customer to prove they aren't a scammer should be a last resort only employed as the bank is shutdown.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.12.28 16:27:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Kwint Sommer How do you suggest we resolve this?
We just sold your shares. Now what?
From a purely financial perspective, this makes sense for ebank: 1. The ROI on Kwint's shares, while steady, is inadequate to reach the goal of a speedy bank recovery. 2. The bank is operating from a state of default, in such a state any asset that could be yanked out from under them such as shares in another public offering is vulnerable, and should be liquidated ASAP.
It's time to stop arguing morals and ethics with this bank. They've been abandoned. Ebank has set the goal of a financial recovery, there is no public plan for an ethical one. My guess is that upon a financial recovery Ray will simply pass the reins over to another CEO and pretend the stink of this mess is washed away.
My advice, for what it's worth, is this: Declare ebank publicly a scam, and in doing so their shares in any and all public offerings null and void; likewise anyone "scamming" ebank henceforth being granted amnesty.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.12.29 03:53:00 -
[35]
Originally by: SencneS There would have been a few options but one I wouldn't have taken is close out and liquidate, to me that seemed very unusual choice of actions.
Unfortunately with no way to force ebank to return the shares, not liquidating means having to inform all of EVE that he'd declared your shares void in line with the multiple breaches of contract ebank has commited with its customers. Otherwise ebank sells the shares as it previously threatened, and Kwint now has a moral dilemma of honoring the debt to an ignorant buyer of said shares.
Much, much easier to just liquidate and reissue if he later sees need for public financing, IMO. Though my guess is Kwint has no real need for public financing and simply does so as an accelerant for the share market, and to keep his name out there.
Bravo, Kwint. Thank you for taking ebank's stuff instead of their crap, it's a pleasant change on these forums.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.12.29 05:08:00 -
[36]
Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Dzil Unfortunately with no way to force ebank to return the shares, not liquidating means having to inform all of EVE that he'd declared your shares void in line with the multiple breaches of contract ebank has commited with its customers.
While I agree, that option was not on the table.
You're correct. Because your CEO stripped any meaningful discussion off the table in favor of pretending to have the upper hand, and attempting yet again to strong arm a favorable result for ebank with no regard for ethical obligations.
Quote: ...none of this would have happened
None of what, exactly? Kwint kicking ebank in the jones and the only uproar being that of applause?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.08 16:57:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Master waka Hey waka here im back from being away from eve for a while i put in my api and clicked to withdraw my isk, my account shows no more isk in ebank, however its not on my character, i sent a message to ebank a few days ago and got nothing so im typing on this forum in case someone reads it, whats up with my isk and iam i getting my isk or not?
Cool story. 1. Your isk is frozen. 2. Anyone's guess.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari Greyhound investments
|
Posted - 2010.01.25 19:42:00 -
[38]
I'm assuming the absence of cheering for achieving this milestone is all hung up in the suspense of what's next to come?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:25:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Solisk Sorry man, the "Raging Public" phase is pretty much over. You missed it by a couple of months and all the issues have been thoroughly discussed.
Not all of them. We still don't know what happened over macho grande.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.02.23 13:15:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Marcus Baltar
Originally by: Ray McCormack Just to let everyone know, our assets topped 700b a few weeks back - the current reflection on our public financials is a drawback of having them update from live data. The missing amounts are due to loans that were given out but required back-end modifications that I have not been able to do yet.
What is different about the loans mentioned in the quote compared to those you have been giving out previously that requires "back-end modifications"?
Have you ever tried to get a receipt from a hooker?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
|
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 04:42:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Dzil on 16/03/2010 04:43:20 Holy crap guys, I solved it.
Just do what the US govt does with social security when it can't pay the bills. Raise the retirement age!
Make it so you have to be 67 years old before you can withdraw from the fund. Sure, it won't make the bank solvent, but you'll be dead before most people figure that out.
Ninja edit Rename it the e-tirement fund.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 12:55:00 -
[42]
Quote:
So, despite all promises to the contrary, it is still impossible to withdraw even fractions of account balances without handing over one's api?
Without implementing BLEEP how can EBANK even produce accurate accounts as it will not be clear how many accounts are still active and waiting on BLEEP and how many are actually inactive. Will BLEEP be implemented before the time limit for submitting apis is reached, at which point accounts will be moved off the books?
It's easy to make recommendations when you're not a programmer, but:
Program an option in that allows one to decline providing API details, formally stating their active status but opting to use BLEEP over direct entry.
Then count these folks towards the number of active players seeking a restoration.
Accounting debacle resolved.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:29:00 -
[43]
Originally by: SencneS
... EBANK: Votes started on how to handle ISK, vote passed unanimously to return account balance to 100%. PUBLIC: Small small minority make waves of posts and threads about how bad it is, yet the biggest account holders who have the largest accounts over 80% of the ISK in EBANK remain quiet.
4 out of 5 victims aren't resisting. We're doing something right!
Quote:
EBANK: Casts vote to allow withdrawals at current valuation, it passes with a condition that we confirm no past defaulter or director get their account balance, along with any known RMTers to EBANK. PUBLIC: Out cry of the idea that EBANK doesn't want to support defaulters and scammers by issuing their ISK to them even at a reduced rate.
Way to intentionally misstate the opposition's point of view. You know damn well most the opposition to this centered around not wanting to give sensitive pilot information to an organization that defrauded them for months/years. The outcry isn't that the public wants isk given back to scammers.
Quote:
EBANK: Accepts BLEEP as an alternative (Which I though was added, my bad it wasn't) EBANK: Accepts alternatives for people to get ISK, hardly anyone takes it.
So that the record is straight: -BLEEP still not implemented -Not 1 isk has left ebank towards the frozen accounts. Folks can buy other folks' accounts for a 5% fee but your ABYSMAL public relations and non-existent progress towards recovery means most people wouldn't buy the accounts for 5% period.
Quote:
EBANK: Offers people to cash in their accounts for PLEX FOR HEITI cause, API Requirement free. Hardly anyone takes it.
Haiti.
I missed this announcement. Was this at the same time you implemented BLEEP? Was it subject to the whole 35% rule based on current assets? How do we know ebank donated the PLEX? I mean you can't find liquidity to pay off the "vocal minority" 20% of your customers at 35% assets/liabilities... where's all the money for PLEX suddenly coming from?
Quote:
EBANK: Almost a year since Ricdic scammed, EBANK has finalized all defaults, found every ISK and asset they could EBANK valued at 710,880,589,367 ISK (current internal sheet as of this post, probably a few days behind) Only way is up now.
Nope, you're forgetting about opportunity cost. Sure, you can ignore that your customers could earn isk faster with their partial accounts restored than you have over the past 9 months. But your customers are smarter than that. They also acknowledge that although you may promise pretty pretty please with cherries on top that you won't scam again, that you can't guarantee it won't happen.
Quote:
SENCNES: On here posting in a long trolled thread reminiscing, and reading everyone following flames posts. Enjoy the read
Another day in paradise.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 04:53:00 -
[44]
Where as the current leadership of ebank is pretty much pathetic at this point, maybe we should launch a donation drive to help out the remaining customers?
It would look something like this:
I auction off a ship for ebank isk. The highest bidder agrees to scratch that much isk off his account. Account holder gets something for his frozen isk, ebank gets to write liabilities off their books.
This way folks with a little extra to give can benefit from a show of goodwill. If it becomes popular enough, we can get a thread going comparing how much isk ebank has returned against the donation drive.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 19:15:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Ray McCormack Here's your profit report. /me groin-thrusts.
I'd say [insert short joke here], but I don't want Ray/AC taking off their pants.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 20:11:00 -
[46]
Seriously? We can't say wnaker without censorship?
What is this, the UK?
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
Dzil
Caldari SafeHouse Investments of Tautology
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 23:26:00 -
[47]
Originally by: RJ Nobel
Originally by: Ray McCormack
It's not my job to satisfy the public's interest further, there are public financials - that is all they will ever get, and it's enough.
I'll agree that the public financials are the best means of communication with the public. I have no interest in trolling or asking pointless questions. I simply want to see Ebank move forward. To that end:
On February 26, 2009, Ebank had assets of 702m and liabilities of 1,914m (public financial's "history" tab).
On March 17th, 2010, Ebank has assets of 711m and liabilities of 1914m.
How does that qualify as "enough"?
Well that's a hell of a lot better than they were doing 6 months ago. The debt is down to 2 billion? I think a recovery by the end of the year is definitely possible.
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m |
|
|
|