The Shadowrun Situation

[Kaelik]

Again, where are you taking it from that anyone actually bought any stock?

Stop being so defensive.

"Anyone trying to buy stock has been scammed."

If "Anyone" == 0, Statement still true.

He's just clarifying that they are not owners, they are members.

[Crissa]

If you don't ask for a signed receipt, too bad for you, right? You just bought a bridge.

No.

State of Washington is the only state I've owned a business in. You have to keep all receipts and declare what you did. You can't just take money in and not declare it. You can't say 'consulting services' unless you select how many hours and employees did the work, and pay withholding taxes. You can't sell 'stuff' without a reseller's ID of the recipient being an in-state or out of state resident (specifically Oregon). Do you want the state breathing down your neck looking for skipped sales tax or whatnot? They don't have an income tax like California or Federal.

So no, a business can't just 'take money in' and forget the receipts.

-Crissa

[Maxus]

So, let me see if I have this straight:

-IMR is run by a crook, and people have been shafted by this crook, big-time.

-People have decided to stop being shafted by this crook, and are moving through appropriate legal channels

-There is enough evidence a judge has found merit in moving forward.

-Any speculation thus far pales in comparison to the facts that have been coming out.

-And we have a dude coming here to complain and whine that this is all speculation and in bad taste or something.

Jeez, T, I think you're misdirecting your anger here.

[Kithkanan]

-There is enough evidence a judge has found merit in moving forward.

lol, CGL thinks it was dismissed. Boy are they in for a surprise. http://catalystgamelabs.com/

[Maxus]

So, where's the info on the hearing that CGL says isn't happening and unfounded evil scurrilous mean-spirited badwrong speculation says is?

[Orca]

I can kind of see how trying to invalidate others peoples ownership of the company and all that entails might be helpful in his immediate situation, but how could claiming that he sold tons of fraudulent stock before a court of law possibly be a good idea in the long run?

Threr's no really good reason to believe there's a long-term plan, staggering from one short-term fix to another models Loren's recent behaviour much better IMO.

[Crissa]

Maxus, Frank pointed us at this document.

But notice, CGL didn't say it isn't happening, only that they weren't found late. So what? It doesn't change that proceedings are continuing. Once again, they're implying something is more important than it was.

-Crissa

[Maxus]

Maxus, Frank pointed us at this document.

But notice, CGL didn't say it isn't happening, only that they weren't found late. So what? It doesn't change that proceedings are continuing. Once again, they're implying something is more important than it was.

-Crissa

I see they were due in court today.

I also notice this:

http://catalystgamelabs.com/

[Crissa]

Yeah. It's a strange thing to mention, honestly.

-Crissa

[Username17]

The motion that was dismissed was the motion for summary judgement. Actually, both sides filed a request for summary judgement in their favor, and neither was granted. The Judge didn't make any statement about whether IMR's filing was late or not, he simply declined to give an immediate ruling before the evidentiary hearing where people actually trot out receipts and bank statements.

Also, IMR's statement:

Today a judge rendered his decision on the first motion in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition involving Catalyst Game Labs.

Is I'm pretty sure false. The first motion was to begin the proceedings early on the grounds that IMR was stalling, and that was granted. Which is why the court summons was expedited to Friday in the first place.

If, not being a lawyer, it turns out that I'm wrong because that was an "order" or a "request" and not a "motion" or something, I apologize ahead of time.

-Username17

[Crissa]

And it's arguable whose motion was first, anyhow.

-Crissa

[Username17]

So anyway, they are going with the June 18th court date for part 2. Which was the immediately next available court date, as established earlier in the week. So no winners and no losers for this week.

-Username17

[Centurion13]

You can't just take money in and not declare it.

I agree. But unless I missed something, that is precisely what has been happening. Product has been sold at conventions and not declared, according to Frank. It is illegal for a business to do this, true, but not unlikely for an individual to represent himself as selling an interest in said business while not actually providing anything of the sort in return for money.

Huh.

Well, the problem is that someone has been using their position as the owner of a company to sell fake shares in... something. Not the first time I have heard of this, mind you. And I believe I mentioned a while back that the IRS was going to have quite a time with the Colemans...

Cent13

[Gelare]

Well, the problem is that someone has been using their position as the owner of a company to sell fake shares in... something.

It's really weird in that there's not actually shares to sell. It's just...nothing. It's just making promises of *something* and delivering *nothing* and getting paid for it. Which is generally fraud. And possibly securities fraud. So, y'know. Good news there.

[Username17]

Loren Coleman gave "part ownership" to a number of people, including Randall Bills, Tara Bills, Phil DeLuca, KS, and David Stansel-Garner. I am not privy to what the exact paperwork people signed looked like, or what it was called when they did it. But they've been receiving tax forms for several years as if they were part owners.

Now Loren Coleman is claiming in court that IMR "is" Loren and Heather Coleman.

-Username17

[Koumei]

IMR's lawyer spends 3 pages detailing why they object. I wonder if they're paying him freelancer rates per word.

This is Loren Coleman, I wonder if he's actually paying the lawyer anything at all.

[Taharqa]

So, let me see if I have this straight:

-IMR is run by a crook, and people have been shafted by this crook, big-time.

No, IMR is actually owned by several people, only two (Loren Coleman and his wife) of which did something wrong. It is likely that the people most "shafted", as you put it, by the Coleman's actions are actually the other owners because it was precisely their share of the CGL pie that Coleman was helping himself to. The Coleman's actions also ultimately "shafted" freelancers and licensees because it depleted CGL's cash reserves below the point where it could make timely payments. On the other hand, most of the people (probably all, actually) bitching on this thread were not "shafted" at all by the Coleman's actions, except for perhaps the slight inconvenience of publishing delays.

-People have decided to stop being shafted by this crook, and are moving through appropriate legal channels

The legal action of Wildfire is not against the Colemans, but rather against CGL. This is not to deny that it was the Colemans' actions that precipitated the whole legal mess, but the potential effects of the legal action go far beyond the Colemans. It is also worth noting that when you consider this, Frank's assertion that the Coleman's are arguing that they are the sole owners of CGL is ridiculous, because the Bankruptcy case in strict legal terms has nothing to do with whether Coleman's withdrawals were legally permissible or not. The legal case is about whether CGL owes money and can or cannot pay it.

-There is enough evidence a judge has found merit in moving forward.

Completely wrong. The only decision the judge has made at this point is that the case should not be immediately decided one way or the other. Not exactly ground-breaking.

-Any speculation thus far pales in comparison to the facts that have been coming out.

I would say that ungrounded speculations about illegally selling stock equal if not surpass the fact that Coleman's withdrawals were not authorized by other owners of CGL.

-And we have a dude coming here to complain and whine that this is all speculation and in bad taste or something.

Jeez, T, I think you're misdirecting your anger here.

"Dude", do me a favor, put down the pitchfork for a second and use your head. The only person misdirecting anger here is yourself. Misdirecting it at me simply because I suggested that people should be more careful about substantiating their claims. I am just as pissed at the Colemans for endangering the game I love as anybody. But that is not an excuse for a mob-like mentality.

[Kaelik]

On the other hand, most of the people (probably all, actually) bitching on this thread were not "shafted" at all by the Coleman's actions, except for perhaps the slight inconvenience of publishing delays.

Yeah, and only people who are the victims of criminals should be allowed to call out criminals for being criminals.

If you aren't an actual victim, your only job is to prevent any non victims from talking about the subject by repeatedly jumping all up in their grill about how they don't have ironclad 100% proof, so they need to stop saying things like "It's possible that..." Because they aren't 100% sure of that it is ture.

[Maxus]

Well, I'm not sure how your fact-checking works, buuuut...

-Loren Coleman is the CEO of IMR and seems to have had a hands-on approach to a lot of the company--hence, he runs it. One of his best friends is his second-in-command who has repeatedly come to Coleman's defense. That's...really running it. When 'theft and embezzlement' is phrased as 'co-mingling of personal and company funds' to make it sound nice, and this same man is staying on and supporting Coleman after he knows Coleman is trying to falsify the reports to the IRS, potentially bringing the Nazgul auditors and federal agents down on himself, his friends, and the whole company...That itself is shady.

-He is a crook. I mean, he asked the person in charge of the financial aspects of the company to falsify an earnings report to the IRS and parent company. Oh, and the whole embezzled-in-the-neighborhood-of-a-million-dollars. And some potential shadiness with the stock. And not paying royalties. And...I'm sure you get the idea.

-Yes, moving forward to looking at the actual evidence now. This will be interesting, especially since there's now public record of IMR admitting Coleman was using the company as a piggy bank, excuse me, 'co-mingling personal and company funds' at the expense of people who should have gotten paid, not getting paid. And some evidence he's been shorting people their due payment, sometimes to the tune of "You don't get paid for your work."

-I'm not sure where you missed the memo, but people don't lose their jobs and go hungry when other people talk crap on the Internet. People who talk smack on the Internet also do not parlay talking smack into a house valued at $650,000 after the real estate market drop. I'd have to say embezzlement and theft and breach of contract and conspiracy to commit fraud and a few other charges besides, I'm sure, are a lot worse than making unsubstantiated claims on the internet.

-This is interesting enough I'm keeping up with it. I like it when the bad guys lose. And given how crazy the known facts are (really, stole $94,000 dollars during a convention and no-one noticed), the ones which come into the light during the rest of the hearing will likely make any unsubstantiated claims we're making look pretty weak.

[Taharqa]

To Maxus and Kaelik, you are both confusing issues here. No one is disputing that Loren L. Coleman took money that he should not have taken and that his actions are at the root of all the existing problems for CGL. I said as much in my post above.

The evidence (I don't require 100%, btw, but 1% would be a good start) I am asking for is about the claim that Coleman fraudulently sold stock. This rumor started because of a rather liberal interpretation of some court documents by Trollman that Coleman was claiming to be the sole owner of CGL and therefore the other people who thought they were owners actually weren't owners. On that point, it might be useful to get the quote from an actual owner from over on the dumpshock forums:

A situation that we're all aware of and see no need to seek legal remedy at this time. Despite all the accusations that have been thrown out, you might notice that the only people bringing up the 'stock sale scandal' are people totally speculating about it.

(my highlights)
I can't seem to link to direct posts, but this should link to you the page.

By the way, those "people" he is talking about, thats you.

As to the "bad guys" getting what they deserved and the duty of good citizens to stand up to criminal behavior, the point that you both ignored in my prior post is that separating out the bad guys from the victims in a messy situation like this is actually quite a bit more difficult than your black and white portrayals. IMO, you are both hiding a good deal of schadenfreude beneath the veneer of moral indignation.

And given how crazy the known facts are (really, stole $94,000 dollars during a convention and no-one noticed), the ones which come into the light during the rest of the hearing will likely make any unsubstantiated claims we're making look pretty weak.

I actually doubt much of anything will come to light, because the trial is about the extent of the debts owed to those three creditors and CGL's ability to pay them. Loren L. Coleman's misadventures will only make entry insofar as they related directly to those points.

[Username17]

The "stock sale scandal" is not speculation. Multiple people made deals with Loren Coleman to acquire partial ownership of IMR that Loren Coleman has since claimed take-backsies on or which were invalid in the first place. David Stansel-Garner's partial ownership was apparently awarded to him out of the ownership percentage of another owner without that other owner's consent. And in any case, these other partial owners exist, and Loren Coleman's legal papers list him and his wife as the only owners. That there is shenanigans is not speculation. Exactly how much of the company each person owns is pure speculation, in no small part because it seems to be like The Producers, where the total adds up to more than 100%.

But yes, Kid Chameleon is a Loren Coleman supporter. So when he says that the situation is one he is "well aware of" but that he won't talk about it, that means exactly what it sounds like it means. He is aware that Loren Coleman is trying to steal the company from other owners and is trying to be on Loren's side - although why he still bats for that team I couldn't say.

-This is interesting enough I'm keeping up with it. I like it when the bad guys lose. And given how crazy the known facts are (really, stole $94,000 dollars during a convention and no-one noticed)

Nitpick time: He stole approximately $100,000 from conventions (plural) over a three year period. His largest documented individual theft is in the $30,000 range. The thing is he was pulling money out faster than once every other day for three years. That really does add up.

And as the only person allowed to write checks or look at the bank statements, he had quite a run of cooked books.

-Username17

[Kaelik]

Taharqa, you are being a stupid shill.

I am not speculating about stock. I am not making black and white portrayls, I haven't even made any portrayls at all. So no, I'm not hiding any schaudenfreude behind moral indignation, because I don't have nor have expressed any moral indignation.

I will continue to call you on your bullshit apologist crap. Especially the part where you probably just quoted Randall Bills defending Loren Coleman like that means Loren didn't lie to Bills, even though Randall publicly admitted that Loren lied to him but that it was totally okay, because God said it doesn't matter, so he will stick by him. So fuck.

If you think Randall Bills saying Loren didn't lie about ownership makes it less likely, you are insane.

Maybe it's not Randall, but it's some other shill, who cares?

[Taharqa]

Taharqa, you are being a stupid shill.
I will continue to call you on your bullshit apologist crap. Especially the part where you probably just quoted Randall Bills defending Loren Coleman like that means Loren didn't lie to Bills, even though Randall publicly admitted that Loren lied to him but that it was totally okay, because God said it doesn't matter, so he will stick by him. So fuck.

If you think Randall Bills saying Loren didn't lie about ownership makes it less likely, you are insane.

Maybe it's not Randall, but it's some other shill, who cares?

You are very effectively demonstrating the reactionary nature of the conversation here. The quote was not from Randall Bills, but from another owner of CGL. It wouldn't have taken much legwork to figure that out, but why do that when you can just spout off on the internet, right?

[Kaelik]

You are very effectively demonstrating the reactionary nature of the conversation here. The quote was not from Randall Bills, but from another owner of CGL. It wouldn't have taken much legwork to figure that out, but why do that when you can just spout off on the internet, right?

Actually, it would take more legwork than I possess to determine that the quote was not from Randall Bills, since it's a goddam forum post, and he runs the forum. He could post whatever he wanted under the name "Frank Trollman" if he wanted.

It's not likely that he would, but it's also not worth my time to waste trying to figure out which completely anonymous person who has presented no evidence to me that he is an owner claims that he is totally an owner, and I should ignore those court documents.

So how about you fucking stop attributing bullshit to me that I didn't say.

I don't give a fuck about this issue because I have less than zero stake in shadowrun. I do on the other hand derive entertainment from this thread, but not when you are shitting on it with your whiny concern trolling.

[Kithkanan]

Actually, it would take more legwork than I possess to determine that the quote was not from Randall Bills, since it's a goddam forum post, and he runs the forum. He could post whatever he wanted under the name "Frank Trollman" if he wanted.

Were did you get that idea? Dumpshock isn't owned by CGL. Don't piss on Dumpshock because you said stupid shit.