Main > Stakeholder Proposals
BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
Thul3:
I still support their worker because there is still a possibility to get it done should this worker get done.
I'm in favour of decentralization
You holding
domain
core worker
legal
brand
etc
its to much centralization to a single identity
binggo:
Bce 3a oдHoro и oдиH 3a Bcex.
Digital Lucifer:
--- Quote from: Thul3 on March 13, 2020, 05:28:57 pm ---Supporting BBF as legal representative should bitshares have one.
Price is also way cheaper 24k compared to 36k and already some years of history.
--- End quote ---
Sorry to inform you, but you're late for about 1 month and 14 days (6.2 weeks) on this vote and decision despite your initial request. Now small recap:
1) You were first holder to ask me will Move setup counter worker. I've stated if holders decide to not support BBF, Move will push replacement worker.
2) On 31st of January (4pm Holland time) I've posted this above as last attempt to uphold existing legal and agreements done. Yours and Alt response was `no support` to BBF.
3) To explain difference to all holders between "fixed price" and "budget price" type of workers for this existing remark on the price:
a) BBF had a 24,000 EUR FIXED PRICE to be legal representative for 365 days and uphold existing agreements. They get paid monthly amount of 2,000 EUR regardless of what they do, and YES it was very simple cost to maintain legal availability for the blockchain. Now it's gone.
b) Move Institute has 36,000 EUR BUDGET AVAILABLE for any need/request done by holders to be processed according to the price table for 365 days and in mind that we need to obtain/redo most of agreements. Budget is bigger for the reason of possibility to redo all the existing/cancelled agreements or proceed with transfers with in-house lawyer/attorney and legal. No payouts will be made unless task is assigned/done.
4) I'll quote reply from BBF (Annemieke Dirkes) on the initial request (3rd of February via email) to extension/grace period for worker to get voted in or possibility for transfer:
"Dear Milos
thanks for reaching out and showing your concerns regarding the BitShares ecosystem. You are indeed correct that the latest worker has not received the required support to continue the work for the BitShares community and the BBF lost its mandate to be the legal representative effectively end of 2019. The agreements between the BBF and other parties where based on the legal representative status of the BBF and as such the counterparties need to be informed by the BBF that it is no longer said representative. This will of course happen in a non-offense way. After thorough investigation we concluded this is the only possible choice.
With regards to done agreements: All ongoing and relevant information that led to signed agreement are public records and found in the relevant channels of the BBF. Unfortunately, I am not in the position anymore to disclose such a list directly due to the legal position and potential liabilities.
With regards to the legal opinion letter: The opinion letter has been distributed to exchanges upon request, enabled through the BBF being the legal representative for the BitShares blockchain. As it stands now I am no longer in the position to distribute it due to the legal position and potential liabilities. Besides that the law firm has explicitly not agreed to publication.
As far as the handover cost: There no cost involved when a new legal representative is being introduced. In a decentralised blockchain like BitShares everybody has the same opportunity to introduce changes or proposals which can voted in based on popular vote. There is no requirement or obligation for any new legal representative to meet the BBF or continue the work that the BBF once did. The community has to decide what happens next, what kind of services they would like to see and which entity is going to be offering those services.
The BBF respects the choice of the BitShares community and has seized its operations as legal representative after 31st of December 2019, and has withdrawn the offer to continue for 2020 after the grace period ended on 31st of January 2020 as stated in the worker proposal https://www.bitshares.foundation/workers/2020-01-bitshares-legal-representative.
Kind regards,
BBF"
I don't know how to please you all and I've arranged best agreement for the blockchain I've possibly could. No BBF despite attempts to uphold it as a first mover, no hurt to the ecosystem and worker that asks nothing unless holders wants it done, but available for any request or legal need, and you stated that 36k budget is more costly than 24k fixed payment. I hope this made it clear once and for all.
P.S. Public statement to holders on Trademark and recent initiative will be released soon, priority is core worker this weekend. In short: I'm getting info that some of you are stressed because of it. There is no need for anyone long-term in this community and with healthy intentions towards ecosystem to be worried about trademark or handle they own. They just need to legally communicate so we can protect our brand from any scam, fake news, defamation or miss-information to wider public. Nobody prevents people of advertising BitShares, but we will prevent scammers, BitShares fake profiles, and people who don't properly promote (miss-information outside of streamline scope that project has). We had 2 years of experience to see how much brand can get hurt by random dojos that nobody can touch - and we had legal representative at the time. BitShares had 7 long years to find a way to protect the code and reputation, and it failed badly. Why ? Possibly that everyone were interested in profits more than consequences and impact of unfinished business on project of this scope.
It's still remains decentralized. Move will hold trademark on `word` and support BBF legally to take over and uphold trademark on `logo`. We do want unity here and we had our chances to be competition if we wanted over past 2 years, we never did and we don't want to. Otherwise I would be not spending so much time around ecosystem or workers for literally free/no-cost.
Above all facts and deal with them. I mean no harm. I meant no harm when i first time asked/warned:
- witnesses on security and lack of vpn on the nodes
- openledger domain security leaks
- bcl failure (ask Kimchi King)
- eosio fail to launch (2 months before hack and delay of launch)
- eosio fail to deliver promises (BFT implenetation to eosio)
- bsip42 disaster
- cryptobridge closure
- spark closure
Now, at the times of my statements you people called me fuder, lunatic, devil, idiot and what else... bad guy eventually. Now after so long me still being here comes the question, was I wrong ? From the answer you find, you may all learn something. So trust me on trademark again - it's very much needed after everything I've seen in past 30 months around here. And tbh I never hurted BitShares brand or it's reputation in any way or I'm gonna do it ever, so same as I wasn't clear why Spark is against gateway legalization, I don't know why some of you are now against Trademark, but smells as dodgy stuff once again. Same as it was said to George -> only time will tell.
Chee®s
Thul3:
Supporting BBF as legal representative should bitshares have one.
Price is also way cheaper 24k compared to 36k and already some years of history.
Xanoxt:
I am working on an alternative legal representative proposal, with options for follow up spokesperson/bizdev proposal(s) that will be structured in a much more flexible way.
Hope to get it up for discussion on this board today, and will be submitting it into the worker system by the end of this week. Stay tuned!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version