Poll: Poloniex Me Not

Hello friends,

I feel and “know” (not legally proven) that Poloniex stole MAID from the community. The Safe Network is an open source project and is in the hands of the community to get rid of this thieves.

Please vote for the following.

When the MaidSafe company created a tool for claiming SafeCoin, would you support a community fork of this tool in which to add 1 line of code excluding the address of the thieves?


  • Yes, Poloniex Me Not!
  • No

0 voters


Polls should not be prefixed with a bias… and mind you don’t make statements you don’t have evidence for.

Certainly Poloniex fell down, both in their judgement and customer service responses, likely on the back of sucking new owners who cared for a quick profit and not doing good by their customer base.

Still, the question is

Once there is a tool for claiming SafeCoin, should it be forked for adding in politics.

I think that’s a slippery error… where do you stop, and whose judgement calls the shots.

The tool is not a route to resolve such problems and creating bias in the tool could be a liability.

Also, I don’t see the point - if MaidSafe rightly do a tool that does the fuction, then forking it still sees that tool available.

If the proposal is some kind of alt safecoin I can’t see how that would work.

tldr; Poloniex would always have MaidSafe’s tool to use.

A poll on whether Poloniex sucks would be simpler.


Maidsafecash or MaidsafeDimitarvision?

P.S. Is it possible to folk ?

1 Like

Friend please see this topic, we clearly have evidence they stole from community member:

I saw the link clearly enough but you’re branded as SAFE ambassador and it’s an assumption that the evidence is there… just a friendly warning that errors follow assumptions. Even with evidence standing up a defence would be costly. Onus on you to prove the challenge… where you have a third party post who might not provide.


You are right about the legality of my statement. What you are confusing is the MaidSafe Company and the Safe network. SAFE is the network and I am branded as its ambassador. Obviously I am not a representative of the company. David made it clear that the company was legality helpless and there was nothing he could do.

But we as a community are not helpless and can choose what code to run on our computers, right? Personally, I cannot stand idly in front of evil…

@netbox offered to show evidence. Would it be ok for you if he show screenshots from the correspondence with them?

1 Like

It’s not me you have to convince.

Still, I’m more curious about what you are proposing. If there’s two tools, Poloniex would just use the one that does work.

The conversion to safecoin is surely a matter only for maidsafe, given the commitment they have made. I cannot see the community has option to affect that… or that it should.


In my opinion, the sensible thing is to separate the community from the companies that develop the code from the very beginning.

David has repeatedly said that he wants MadeSafe to be one of the many code developers for the SAFE network. For this to happen, there must be a foundation with a separate official git hub and separate links to the code. Ie MadeSafe publishes the code, the community foundation approves it, and uploads it to its repository. If the community decides to change the code of the claiming tool to work only with the community network Poloniex will not be able to pick up the stolen (not legally proven) MAID.

1 Like

Then I’m unconvinced.

The conversion of token onto the network is a fundamental base requirement.

Introducing politics to any fundamental is a liability.

Once the network is up and the tokens are converted, then you can fork whatever. Don’t fork with the fundamentals.


Okay, let me ask the question like this. Would you join a community SAFE network in which the “stolen” coins have been removed?

Once the network is up and running and there is a conversion for 1:1 done, then alsorts of challenge to the majority will occur over time, relative to alsorts of interests and that SAFE is for everyone.

The base is that SAFE is for everyone, even those who you wish were not.

To be expected other currencies might arise over time, which allow users to dump safecoin for safecoin-cash or safecoin-principalled or safecoin-with-everything-but-not-that-one-we-don’t-like - but you’ll perhaps have to think of a better name.

Law and politics are like violence - people resort to them when they run down other options.

That Poloniex was able to get away with not honouring the reasonable expectations we put upon 3rd parties we trust, is as unfortunate as it is legacy. The best solution is to recognise Poloniex as part of the problem that SAFE is looking to solve but not be affected by that and corrupted by it.

Aside from the fact that Poloniex could mount a legal challenge on behalf the coins they truely do own for themselves.


Everything you say is so :dragon: Still I need to know please, will you personally join a community SAFE network without Poloniex?

Polo can transfer its holdings to a new address and convert to Safe that way. I think any way to prevent that is useless, unfortunately. Unless you want to scan the Omni blockchain for those new addresses and block them instantly too?

1 Like

As above, I’m unconvinced. Certainly not before the 1:1 conversion is done.

Once the network is up and the topic revisited then it’ll be a sense of where the majority currency strength is. Personally, I try to avoid politics… it’s a dirty business resolving who is worthy… money the root of evil etc… it’s just a tool for manipulation… and money is inherently political; so, seeing SAFE rise above the nonsense for the conversion not excluding anyone, is important.


I’ve watched too much Rick and Morty.

1 Like

This is not a slut dragon, friend… :dragon:

1 Like

All dragons are.


I don’t understand this poll, and I’m not going to spend more time trying or discussing here.

This is what I see as wasted anger energy. Much better to spend this time creating something useful.


For me, it comes down to this. A member of the community complained that he had been robbed. So I presented a possible solution.

Is it a good or bad solution? I personally feel it is and we have a precedent in the crypto where it is applied (Hex).

So the community will decides whether to act or not :dragon:

It sounds purely punitive, and won’t actually benefit anyone, and adding this code into the genesis of the network with diametric aims seems off to me. So I’d personally not be in favour.