| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 24 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Syds Sinclair
   |
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:21:00 -
[541]
 Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
This point is illustrated a few posts down by SencneS while he clearly states, no word play, that EBANK and Kwint's actions are on equal ground.
Can you twist that a little more please.. WOW that's really pulling that out of context.. How disappointing..
..Don't try to ride Shar's coat tails by implying that my content doesn't meet your expectations. I've been not meeting peoples expectations for years now!
So how about this little gem?
Quote:
I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT,
Let me be honest, I have no desire nor gain any satisfaction by spinning or twisting others posts. I honestly try to take the connotations and inflictions of peoples posts into full consideration.
If I quote something out of context, you or anyone, please enlighten me and if your argument suffices me then I will happily take it back, evaluate, and re comment.
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:40:00 -
[542]
..To Rafia and anyone else who still cares. It's clear to me that SencneS nothing more then a shill, a cheerleader, and a herald for EBANK and especially Ray.
To SencneS. This nightmare could have all been avoided is EBANK and Co. Had just takin the approach of liquidation > paying a % to all investors instead of trying to keep the bank running,and I might add collecting a tidy salary for the board.
I think everyone knows who and what your plans were to take care of first.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:21:00 -
[543]
Wealth, howsoever got, in Eve makes
Lords of morons and gentlemen of thieves;
Aptitude and intellect are needless here;
'Tis impudence and money that grants fame. |
Krythas
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:27:00 -
[544]
I'm just surprised that kwint can withhold 3bn and the world is collapsing for investors yet AC can donate 24bn on behalf of the 1300 ebank account holders to Japan for good and no one blinks.
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:34:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Krythas
I'm just surprised that kwint can withhold 3bn and the world is collapsing for investors yet AC can donate 24bn on behalf of the 1300 ebank account holders to Japan for good and no one blinks.
..You see, that is precisely because Kwint isn't infallible like EBANK. And because he didn't freeze that 3bil.
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:44:00 -
[546]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
..To reference a previous thread in which you called someone cheeky, I did just finish a cheeky six pack of pale ale.
On a side note, Shar, be expecting an Evemail from me when I get to my PC. Evegate and iPads don't seem to play nice with each other.
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:46:00 -
[547]
Riding coat tails of Shar.... p-lease... You along with a few others I've enjoyed debating something that happened years ago from my perspective and from the general perspective of the people not involved. I see that post and am saddened that the delightful converse is coming to an end..
Quote:
I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT
It might have been too subtle and I'm sorry for that. I'll even go so far as to say both Kwint and EBANK have mirrored each others actions. Kwint paid out his bond to everyone but EBANK. EBANK paid out Kwint alone. So even this aspect is also identical from a purely functional perspective. However, on a 1:1 level Just EBANK, Just Kwint, No one else.. Kwint owes EBANK about 3 Billion ISK.. EBANK doesn't owe Kwint anything. Kwint did what he did in the name of the betterment for EBANK customers. Yet doing what he did, he denied those very people he was fighting for, 3 Billion ISK. He kept that ISK, and EBANK customers will never see it.
Context of an opinion must be considered, when I view EBANK and Kwint and their actions, they are the same on a grand scale, but the reasoning behind why, in my eyes, Kwint is a scammer and EBANK is not is all in the context.
From EBANK's perspective looking at Kwint and his actions against EBANK, Kwint is a scammer.
From Kwint's perspective looking at EBANK and EBANK's actions against Kwint, how can Kwint call EBANK a scam? EBANK honored it obligations to Kwint.
From anyone looking from both perspectives looking at all actions taken by both, both are the same. <-- This is the point I was making when I posted that statement above.
From anyone looking from both perspectives looking at each's actions to each other..... Kwint owes EBANK 3 Billion ISK. <-- This is point I stand behind.
Forget the intentions, forget the amounts, forget the people, look at just the actions EBANK did to/for Kwint, and the actions Kwint did to/for EBANK. This is why, in my eyes, Kwint is a scammer.. Yet on a grand scale both are no better then the other at this very moment in time. The very second EBANK pays dividends though, they are NOT the same. And all you're left with is, Kwint has obligations to EBANK..
Amarr for Life |
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.14 23:57:00 -
[548]
..So what you're saying is, if you look at only specific instances, and under a microscope, you can infer just about anything! Quick! Someone get President Obama on the phone and tell him!
Plus maybe you should consider the reasoning behind Kwint's actions was in part to the way EBANK and Co. were handling the totality of the situation. So you can't view his actions just from under the EBANK >> Kwint relations.
|
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 00:06:00 -
[549]
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
..So what you're saying is, if you look at only specific instances, and under a microscope, you can infer just about anything! Quick! Someone get President Obama on the phone and tell him!
Plus maybe you should consider the reasoning behind Kwint's actions was in part to the way EBANK and Co. were handling the totality of the situation. So you can't view his actions just from under the EBANK >> Kwint relations.
Anyone can justify everything using anything. Congrats.
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 00:09:00 -
[550]
..Maybe from a PR perspective, if EBANK and Co. care about that sort of thing (lolrite?!), you shouldn't post any more about EBANK's public policies and reasoning behind their actions. You seem to make numerous gaffes and end up having to appologise and make corrections.
Notice how many corrections of my posts I've EVER had to make. None. And that comes precisely from me working from a sound and solid philosophical plantform and not from an emotional reactive platform.
What I say I mean and my intentions are to convey my thoughts. Not to pacify the public and justify arbitrary actions.
Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy pointing our your illogical statements. So keep em' comin'!
|
|
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 00:13:00 -
[551]
Originally by: Hexxx
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
..So what you're saying is, if you look at only specific instances, and under a microscope, you can infer just about anything! Quick! Someone get President Obama on the phone and tell him!
Plus maybe you should consider the reasoning behind Kwint's actions was in part to the way EBANK and Co. were handling the totality of the situation. So you can't view his actions just from under the EBANK >> Kwint relations.
Anyone can justify everything using anything. Congrats.
.."So give me your full APIs, insure your ships with my company, and just be happy that a board of elites take the time to interact with your pathetic existience! You'll get your isk with NO interest and you'll be happy about it! And for God's sake stop asking those pesky questions!"
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 02:46:00 -
[552]
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
Notice how many corrections of my posts I've EVER had to make. None.
Well of course you don't have to make clarifications to your posts. No one is deliberately reposting your words in the incorrect context, and insinuating they mean something else. I've at least kept the same opinion and position and mealy expanded on my previous posts. You can call that whatever you like, far be it for me to deny you the pleasure you obviously take in self deluded perception others can't see the stunts you pull so blatantly. The problem with that delusion is, people do, they are just to nice to say anything.
Enjoy the fantasy, oh who am I kidding, you're just a reply button away from maintaining that delusion and post something new and insightful! 
Amarr for Life |
Selene D'Celeste
Caldari
The D'Celeste Trading Company
ISK Six
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 03:58:00 -
[553]
Why do you keep talking? Please just stop.
______________________________
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 04:43:00 -
[554]
Originally by: Selene D'Celeste
Why do you keep talking? Please just stop.
And ignore direct questions.. How rude..
You caused this post Selene, not me, You... You have only yourself to blame.
Amarr for Life |
Florestan Bronstein
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 06:57:00 -
[555]
Originally by: SencneS
I've at least kept the same opinion and position
that's the issue.
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 19:52:00 -
[556]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Originally by: SencneS
I've at least kept the same opinion and position
That's the issue.
Then we're all to blame. I see those people who support Kwint's actions haven't changed their minds either. I would put this down to, neither side has come up with a significant argument to change either sides minds. My opinion can change on one condition.. Kwint return 3 Billion to EBANK. That's all it takes for me..
I'd bet ISK if EBANK wasn't in the mix people would be clawing at Kwint and trolling him, not the other entity. People LOOOOVEEEE to hate, and if EBANK's involved in anyway they will bend over backwards and argue with full force against EBANK. Being blinded by contempt for EBANK doesn't make what Kwint did, right.
Evidence of this is all over the last few pages, people despise EBANK so much they are actually condoning scamming. 
Amarr for Life |
Khanid Voltar
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 20:36:00 -
[557]
Edited by: Khanid Voltar on 15/04/2011 20:37:15
Originally by: SencneS
Evidence of this is all over the last few pages, people despise EBANK so much they are actually condoning scamming.
Seriously Sencnes I am beginning to think you aren't too bright. It is precisely your continued assertion that Kwint scammed that is making people argue against you.
Why don't you do the rest of us a favour and stop posting on this matter?
edit - and for the record:
Originally by: Ray McCormack
In Kwint's position, I would have done the same thing.
|
rsol
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.04.15 22:34:00 -
[558]
ive been reading all this over the years and id have to say.........
Ray is NOT the person you should be blaming.
HE came in to sort out all this mess when noone else would. it saddens me that after the real scammer who took huge amounts is forgotten (Ricdic) the guy who did loads of bad loans and his cohorts in evebank at the time.
All I, as an investor, want to hear is reports from the staff about where they are in the proceedings. The rest of you pions could be making your money back with the amount of time spent whining about losing out on a RISKY VENTURE. investments CAN go down you know...welcome to commerce.
Whoever is doing the shares please get to the R's as soon as you can so i dont have to trawl through all this bile....
|
Krythas
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 00:55:00 -
[559]
How does "trawling through the bile" make any difference as to whether you get shares or not ?
|
Elise DarkStar
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 03:32:00 -
[560]
Originally by: rsol
Ray is NOT the person you should be blaming...
Except he dragged the whole thing out two years longer than it needed to be in an attempt to stroke his spaceship ego, but ya, besides that, he's a hero...
|
|
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 05:37:00 -
[561]
Originally by: Khanid Voltar
..and for the record:
Originally by: Ray McCormack
In Kwint's position, I would have done the same thing.
I want to congratulate you on doing something no one else had done. This is not a troll, but this made me look at something I hadn't considered. This whole time I've been looking at the situation from complete isolation, the actions and the effects on each person's actions and drawing a conclusion totally focused on the raw actions with little regard for personal connection and their viewpoint. I've been focused on detaching myself from Ray's and Kwint's views because in arbitration you can't take the either side to determine what is the best outcome. Each person who reads and has been reading all these posts, I'm sorry, I've been viewing it from arbitration.
Below is a real non-bias finalized actions based on if I was either Ray or Kwint.
As Ray:-
Having a 5 Billion ISK investment that was paying dividend all of a sudden stop paying dividends just to me, I would try an offload that investment to someone else. I certainly wouldn't want to keep that 5 Billion investment, also knowing that liquidation is a possibility I would't give it a second though on selling those bonds. Then being denied selling them, I would do exactly the same action, clear the account, removing my liability to that person, at least up until the point their debt to me is satisfied. While I would be more tactful, Ray's actions mirror my own.
As Kwint:-
Having paid out interest for months but not getting the interest I am due on my investment I would indeed stop payment to that entity. Now hearing that the entity will sell my bonds, removing the leverage I am applying to them would irritate me. However, this is where Kwint's and my own actions would differ. I would allowed the sales of those bonds. Not because I'm trying to make point here but because it solves the issue I have with me paying someone who is not paying me. I have no issue paying the bond's dividend, but I hate the idea of me paying someone, that is owing me interest. End of issue.
Extension - If Ray didn't say he was going to sell the bonds, I would have continued my leverage by allocating EBANK's part of the interest on the bond to the rest of the Bond holders, so they get the allocation, kind of like a Bonus. Yes, an asshat move, but I can easily justify it.
Extension II - If I chose to deny Ray selling the bond because I was furious over the loophole, and in turn Ray removed my account balance, and only asked for the different to be paid, I would have paid it. The reason I would pay the 3 Billion is because I recognize one important thing. I'm dead serious here, I'm not trying to prove my argument. Deep down inside, I would have zero justification for keeping that 3 Billion, I can justify denying EBANK that three billion, but I fully recognize that ISK doesn't belong to me, it belongs to the EBANK customers. However in true capitalist fashion I can justify one thing.. The amount of lost interest I would of had. I would have issued EBANK just - 2,627,008,811.08 ISK.
--------
On reflection, looking at what actions I would take, I am very comfortable with the outcome, it's actually funny that it would never have gone as far as it did. I would have let EBANK sell those bonds removing the initial issue I had with paying them. I certainly wouldn't have closed out my Bond and liquidated.
I guess everyone has a point in which what they can justify. Clearly mine is based around "only what is rightfully mine within the initial contract" So my opinion now is, Kwint doesn't owe EBANK 3 Billion, just 2.627B. Is he a scammer? I'm really sorry to say, in my eyes he still is. I personally can't justify his final action, and I know right now people are thinking this whole post was a load of bull.
Thank you Khanid Voltar for showing me the one thing I never considered. It's unfortunate that I feel people will call Bull****, but for me I've come accustomed to it.
Amarr for Life |
Ray McCormack
Nordar Innovations.
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 06:43:00 -
[562]
Originally by: Roguehalo
Amarr's just Rays gopher........
AC, I would totally stick my hand up you and put on puppet shows for the children. Not necessarily at the same time.
I agree that shooting people with a headache in the head is a good idea, because it will stop their headaches. |
trance atlas
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 11:29:00 -
[563]
Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Roguehalo
Amarr's just Rays gopher........
AC, I would totally stick my hand up you and put on puppet shows for the children. Not necessarily at the same time.
do you own sock puppets?
|
Loraine Gess
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 12:34:00 -
[564]
Every time I get back to MD, I'm still amazed this thread is around. Can anyone (very slowly) explain to my non-market-guru mind why it would possibly take more than a year to liquidate any number of assets in EVE?
|
Riley Moore
Sentinum Research
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 12:54:00 -
[565]
Can anyone sent me a Ebank share. I'd love to have one :P I collect funky shares. Got a few other ones and most noticably, 125! H3RP3S shares still
|
Orion GUardian
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 13:12:00 -
[566]
You want one share? when I get mine and you give me 1m ISK I'll give you an ebank share
|
Malonical
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 17:52:00 -
[567]
Originally by: Loraine Gess
Every time I get back to MD, I'm still amazed this thread is around. Can anyone (very slowly) explain to my non-market-guru mind why it would possibly take more than a year to liquidate any number of assets in EVE?
No market explanation required:
1. RL
2. What's their actual motivation to liquidate at this point? Is it so people stop complaining? Not really a motivator in my opinion.
3. If you were sitting on a pile of money that you weren't required to give back, what would you do? (and just for the record, I don't believe EBank is "scamming" us with this liquidation. I think we will get part of our money back eventually.)
4. RL
|
Jasdemi
|
Posted - 2011.04.16 20:15:00 -
[568]
What Malonical said.
I personally would've kept the money.
|
Mikahl
Gallente
Cy Corp
The Haven Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.04.17 00:12:00 -
[569]
Have you guys got to M yet?
:D
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.04.18 01:03:00 -
[570]
..I've taken some time to consider this discussion and the people involved. I also received some expert advice and perspective from a great source.
SencneS, you and I are campaigning from platforms that are light years apart. Like the Hatfields and Mccoys, only with less moonshine and more Quafe.
Because of our divided stations and positions in this matter, (BoD / investors, outsiders), this debate might be able to come to an equilibrium, but will never be on the same page. An impasse has been reached, and then beat with a dead cat.
You believe that the choices that were made and the actions that have and are taking place are the correct ones. Thus being taken thru the wringer while toiling away at tedious and unrewarding efforts in the name of doing what you think is right must be a nightmare.
That being said, let me express a few musings that I have yet to. My posts weren't designed with the intentions of attacking you personally, they were aimed at "EBANK past, present, future, and the BoD." I just happened to take advantage of, and for granted that, you, SencneS, not Ray, not Ric, not AC or any one else are the individual who has willingly stepped out into the firing range, fielded the assault, and tried to provide insight from your side of the street. That aspect is commendable.
This is illustrated perfectly in post # 559 where you offered an introspected analysis of a contentious topic.
I've been struggling with whether or not I should include my main points of contention with EBANK which, I think, are at worst viable and at best paramount to the resentment directed twords the BoD. A few actions that, to me, are the catalysts. Furthermore, to have a clearer and more concise group of topics to debate from, and also to show that my intentions are not to troll or take posts out of context.
I've decided not to post them here. If it interests you to know, I can provide them to you via Evemail.
In closing, I hope no hard feelings were derived from this debate.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 24 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |