Author Topic: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson  (Read 6831 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2020, 05:04:16 pm »
Sufficient time has passed for the collection of feedback. Both workers are now put on-chain, see here for a summary.

Please consider both proposals for your next voting update:

Dear BBF,

On behalf of non-profit Zavod Premik (Move Institute) and followed with quoted part of presented workers:

"All existing legal agreements must be considered void if the BitShares Blockchain Foundation is no longer the legal representative for the BitShares Blockchain, with all consequences that come with it (effective date 31st January 2020)."

we came here to offer 3 possible options/scenarios and discuss them a bit in front of holders.

Option 1)
Consider 7 days extension on the quoted statement above while I personally reach out to the holders and get confirmation that they are not supporting your worker. This may result in worker being approved, considering that workers never had proper forum thread, usual lobbying and politics that holders are expecting from workers. Anyway, I do understand the sentiment considering state of entire ecosystem in previous 6 months.

Option 2)
Move Institute would be willing to create alternative workers if `Option 1)` ends with negative response. We would be requesting costs for BBF services to transfer all agreements and handover all legal documentation to us (in case the holders decide to support `Option 2` so we can plan budget accordingly)

There is no Option 3 right now - so please let's do this in a reasonable way, because the BitShares blockchain relies on us in many ways including our main BTS core token listings, agreements and legal letters done in the past through BBF.

Notice for BBF:
Option 1) and request for extension comes as late, but an official request from Move Institute. Email will follow over the weekend.

Notice for holders/proxies:
Move Institute would be offering worker that has far more complexity and would involve additional worker for legal funds/budget. Multi-sig between Committee and Move Institute for those funds would be a must in order to make possible any potential proceedings, listings or legal needs on the yearly basis.

Personal statement:
I have a lot on my plate and to be clear I didn't had much time to follow up on forums or to run around following up entire politics (not even update my votes ). I personally support this worker because the price and the terms for being legal representative are very feasible and communication is already established between parties involved in agreements.

Regards.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 07:28:21 pm by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)

Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2020, 10:26:03 am »
Sufficient time has passed for the collection of feedback. Both workers are now put on-chain, see here for a summary.

Please consider both proposals for your next voting update:

I agree with Digital Lucifer's statement, price and the terms for these workers make sense and changing legal representative is a very complex task, would be better to continue with the same legal representative.
Be part of the change and vote for the bitshares-vision proxy!
Committee account: iobanker-core
Ammar Yousef - CEO @ ioBanker OÜ

Offline Xanoxt

  • Committee member
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Team RuDEX
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: xnxt
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #32 on: February 03, 2020, 12:58:44 pm »
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!

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #33 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.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #34 on: March 14, 2020, 10:14:56 am »
Supporting BBF as legal representative should bitshares have one.



Price is also way cheaper 24k compared to 36k and already some years of history.

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
« Last Edit: March 14, 2020, 11:40:56 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2085
    • View Profile
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #35 on: March 15, 2020, 07:58:54 am »
Bce 3a oдHoro и oдиH 3a Bcex.

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2020, 08:12:46 pm »
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

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #37 on: March 28, 2020, 03:03:25 am »
1) Domain - given by original owner, never asked for it. Why nobody else picked it 2017 ? Ended up in non-profit as a request of community. Maybe community would be happier if I gave it back to CNX ?

2) your idea was for me to take on core worker. I was the only one willing to spend months on actually assembling core work, not just ask for money like other offers did without even idea what to do. I hold no core team, I manage core team for 35$/h which is nearly 5x less than previous manager

3) you as someone who was publicly destroying BBF in all groups this is a twist. We are attorney and a legal representative for the blockchain/community not the legal. Best part, i'm not even on the worker. Unless holders and move doesn't come to agreement what will be done that worker holds only legal liability for this ecosystem without taking single BTS. Small thanks would be nice if not vote

4) once you, alt and cn-vote demonstrated very wrong centralization event of refund400k, I did what I had to protect the brand. You as holder had  BBF as legal representative 2.5 years to do so, and any of you holders individually for circa now 7 years. It's my fault you haven't paid 1200 euros or just made the order but I did ?

Worried what might happen ? Worry not. BitShares can only be better not worse. Did no damage to it in 3 years and will not change in a lifetime. I will protect it from any damage though, without ask, blink or consensus (e.g. trademark)

And for ignorance on BBFs worker and position around the blockchain, why just not reach them out directly but just stiring publicly fire ?

And to be clear - even cn-vote group came to reason and all they needed was someone willing really to break language barrier, while you in the meantime drifted away from it, without any concrete reason apart from trademark initiative that made you turn 180 degrees. You have some handles there ? What's up for real ? 

Chee®s
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 07:36:56 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #38 on: March 28, 2020, 03:46:53 am »
And most important part that you missed... Escrow.

Ask BBF who negotiated the terms and asked them to be escrow for all these upcoming workers and based on what.

Also, while you're there, ask them is Move centralized owner of brand or we (as we always did), agreed to collaboration and decentralization where

Move Institute is owner of trademark on word
BBF handling ownership of trademark on logo.

You might reconsider your actions, it's still not late for you to stop being so wrong, so we can actually together make BitShares better instead of whatever is your intent atm.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #39 on: March 28, 2020, 04:03:43 pm »
Quote
1) Domain - given by original owner, never asked for it. Why nobody else picked it 2017 ? Ended up in non-profit as a request of community. Maybe community would be happier if I gave it back to CNX ?


1.Domain was given to you by "Stan"  .If i remember correctly bbf said themself that it was transfered in a wrong way which should never happen


Quote
2) your idea was for me to take on core worker. I was the only one willing to spend months on actually assembling core work, not just ask for money like other offers did without even idea what to do. I hold no core team, I manage core team for 35$/h which is nearly 5x less than previous manager

Correct that was in december with the argumentation of urgent need to develop important features like defi .
it was also the solution for your $3k need.

3) you as someone who was publicly destroying BBF in all groups this is a twist. We are attorney and a legal representative for the blockchain/community not the legal. Best part, i'm not even on the worker. Unless holders and move doesn't come to agreement what will be done that worker holds only legal liability for this ecosystem without taking single BTS. Small thanks would be nice if not vote

I and many other accused BBF of bad work and vote selling by adding their escrow.Still if i would have to decide about their and your legal worker i would chose theirs as even their escrow service was shitty their legal was always neutral even i hated their indirect threat of delisting.
Best option for me would be xanoxt because he has no relation to any bigger proxy.


Quote
4) once you, alt and cn-vote demonstrated very wrong centralization event of refund400k, I did what I had to protect the brand. You as holder had  BBF as legal representative 2.5 years to do so, and any of you holders individually for circa now 7 years. It's my fault you haven't paid 1200 euros or just made the order but I did ?

You had to protcect the brand ?I mean seriously its just a plan to gain more power on bitshares to make you indispensable.
I mean everyone disagreeing with your threats even i don't understand what they are worried about since you own nothing just an EU brand on a name and nothing more.BTS holders can always rebrand .You did it for your own personal benefit only to be indispensable.
I mean core members are even talking to pay some "fee" so you sit calm.

It's not a healthy situation and giving big power to such a person who is many times attacking people threating to sueing them for their voting decissions is not something i support.
Your demand about all social media accounts to get approved by you already showed how uncontrolled your actions are.
Did you had any authority to demand all social media accounts to get approved by you ?

Quote
And for ignorance on BBFs worker and position around the blockchain, why just not reach them out directly but just stiring publicly fire ?

I did spoke to them.Their answer get the worker active and we will see.


Quote
And to be clear - even cn-vote group came to reason and all they needed was someone willing really to break language barrier, while you in the meantime drifted away from it, without any concrete reason apart from trademark initiative that made you turn 180 degrees. You have some handles there ? What's up for real ? 

Oh you mean the new cn-vote leadership who is doing inside deals with beos ?
With BEOS from which owner you got the domain.
And which core worker you execute without even thinking if its at current situation really needed.
Didn't i asked you as first on december and pushed defi and other important features for bitshares ?
Even asked why its taking so long not knowing what happened to you and told you to take your time and during that time
you present a completly new core worker based on the nonsense of a group who tries to dictate everything with their garbage.


They just have 270 million votes.
How come they dictate everything what is on core proposal ?


« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 05:13:19 pm by Thul3 »

Offline R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
    • View Profile
Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #40 on: March 30, 2020, 12:28:20 am »
Can the elected spokesperson please mitigate the bitasset situation? Perhaps it's time to remove the 'bit' prefix to avoid users getting scammed?

Offline sschiessl

Re: BBF Asking to be Elected as Approved Spokesperson
« Reply #41 on: March 30, 2020, 05:30:55 am »
Can the elected spokesperson please mitigate the bitasset situation? Perhaps it's time to remove the 'bit' prefix to avoid users getting scammed?

There is no elected spokesperson anymore.