Given that these revelations are coming out and the platform has been in development for a couple of years now with no real end in sight visible, the development team members seem to be quitting, etc, I would assume that you’re going to struggle to sell the N99 - this information being released is probably going to have a massively negative effect on it’s valuation, unfortunately.
Hopefully there is some way for the project to continue. I’d still really like to see it working on safenet. This is the main reason I invested.
You really think SEEDs would have kept pace with Bitcoin since ICO? Perhaps you should look at dollar values rather than Bitcoin, which I think would equate to around 0.09 BTC for those SEEDs.
Lets all get together and go after him for fraud, unless he refunds everyones BTC they invested.
Please respect the forum guidelines and take any trading to the topic for other coins. Offering to sell coins is considered trading
Use this topic instead
what are the guidelines for someone scamming the community through a crowdsale.
Considering the crowdsale was a long time ago, I doubt the present tense of scamming is valid.
At this time we will leave the topic here so people can discuss, expose, rebuttal, etc. To remove the topic would not serve the community but be hiding details under the carpet.
As to your precise question, if we the community knew it was a scam at the time of the crowdsale offering then the topic would not exist would it. If its found out during the crowdsale then people will post the facts for all to see. We have newer guidelines for what is posted on the front page and this one predates those guidelines. Anyhow have a read of the guidelines for yourself as we don’t hid them. Click the three horz bars top right and then click “guidelines” https://safenetforum.org/faq
According to my findings (I closed out my browser windows, didn’t save my history - apologies for no links, but this is all searchable on the internet) there is little you can do from a legal standpoint, because most fraud investigations are in much larger numbers. N99 falls under the radar. You would need more than just 5 or 6 investors registering a complaint. The numbers that cyber-crime units look at are five hundred investors and 500 Mill to start getting serious about charges. Tim is a little fish, hardly noticeable. You might be better off filing a local personal suit, not sure how far you would get. Don’t take my word for any of this, though.
The entire community would have to look at other options to get value from seed. Perhaps Tim could be welcomed back in order to explain, apologize and make a plan to repay. You might get more bang for your buck. I am sorry I don’t have more to report.
I expect the words of @we_advance , so far we have had updates of what he has in mind. I believe that if your project is sound, an exchange premiere could attract new investors and give the possibility of exit to those who do not want to continue.
A convincing project has to be presented. I hope @we_advance know how to do it.
I don’t think we should talk about fraud until we know what @we_advance think. So far we’ve had their updates. The truth is that I should have said something by now, especially when someone accuses me of fraud.
I’m an investor in N99, but for me personally, this is marked as mismanagement of funds. Please don’t take any legal actions or encourage others to do so. People always have this idea of something failing and keep hammering on that like there isn’t another option. You fail when you don’t realize that you hold a token of a project, you and other token holders fail when you don’t realize that that is your vote and that we should support @we_advance. If this project was really important to you, put your seeds where your mouth is. @we_advance you have my full support even if you screwed up, we all screw up some more than others sometimes.
To my knowledge another project that was suppose to be on the SAFE Network Safe Exchange, didn’t even deliver code yet, but their token is at an all time high. @we_advance biggest mistake imho is not putting his token on an exchange, it gives your project exposure and let the people who don’t support you liquidate their assets.
Way that I see it, this project didn’t fail, we_advance is not a scammer (back in the days this dude was out there constantly making video’s interviewing other people, talking about Maidsafe), please let’s forgive him for his mistakes and help him out. Helping out, means financially supporting him, maybe something like a milestone based development process would help. If we don’t support him, then yes this project did fail, if you want it to fail because in your mind you have lost all your money and there is no other option for you, then be a man about your lost.
I said it before “People won’t even support you with your own token, if you fail”, please proof me wrong and let’s look at solutions and this project moving forward. This guy is an ant, everybody makes mistakes, it’s falling and standing.
Hang in there @we_advance you have my full support (not words, money if you want to advance your project). Live = people, people…
Please not a DAO repeat…
@Lee_Travis thanks for sharing
I applaud the supportive position you are taking in this. I’ve been following this project since inception and support the sentiment of @we_advance not being a scammer. I never met Tim in person but know from observing his involvement in the SAFE network community he has had the best of intentions. His efforts in bringing awareness and wider involvement were always encouraging. Unfortunately when people invest in early stage “crypto” projects they don’t understand the responsibilities they also have to push the project, and help with and support more thorough and efficient decision making. Clearly there is some fiduciary responsibilities the project founder(s) have but early stage investors have theirs too. Like investing in early stage startups, the odds of gains are marginal. Even more so when attempting to build with tech that is bleeding edge like SAFE. Obviously the game and expectations in this space are different.
Really hope the team at N99 is able to rise above these challenges, be frank and transparent, and with the support of their early investors and community, ultimately deliver a working product on the network.
@we_advance should you become accountable to the investors and become transparent about what’s happened here, open up about the finance issues, project delivery timelines, etc., I’m sure you will find the community here to be supportive. Empty promises or silence when confronted are only going to destroy what faith people still have in your project.
If you’re unable to carry on, find someone else to assign the work over to - there’s a good chance someone like @Lee_Travis would be willing to finish the project if you step aside.
Also, just to point this out, your github repository seems to be empty, when are you planning to open-source the work you have done so far - if the project does fold, open-sourcing the code to the community would be a great step towards the direction of reparations.
Hope you’re around man. I know you’re a great guy,
Good communication does wonders.
But I guess not everyone is on this forum 20 times a day like me lol so can’t blame you. It’s only been a few days honestly, to be fair
I agree with this sentiment @19eddyjohn75. Tim’s biggest crime here is not understanding basic principles of money or value. In short he is financially illiterate. Tim has great strengths in art, visualization and networking. I personally don’t appreciate his videos concerning the updates of N99, nor do I think his art should be a part of the branding. In fact I think the branding should be changed entirely to something like Creation-seed. I don’t think Tim or Dawn should ever be in charge of investors’ money or ever hold a crowdsale where they themselves control the funds, nor do I think they should have control or possession of the seed asset, except for maybe their share. I do think Tim should get paid a reasonable amount for his time and efforts. I think that those payments should be a standard amount, and not an obscene one. Perhaps he has taken enough at this point since his only investment is his time and not his money. I could not carry on developing for Tim under the previous conditions, mostly because if you want to be on an exchange, it needs to be financed as it is in the upwards amount of 60 k in most cases. For example Cryptopia requires one million ‘Dot’ and has only ever required one million ‘Dot’, but the value of both Dot and BTC have increased significantly. It’s important to point out here, though, that it would not have been nearly the cost if Tim had gotten the seed to an exchange straight away in 2016. Every month that goes by, things change. Tim and Dawn are too slow to react in most cases. You also have to have a lot of financial transparency that must be met, and you have to have followed all the rules; namely being registered in the country of office and establishing a history of due diligence. I have an intimate knowledge of all of Tim’s vision, and ninety percent of it could be done. As you pointed out, investors will have to step up and take a deeper role by creating a board of administrators and creating a financial consortium including a trustee and accountant. I am not willing to handle finances ever, except my own.
In my opinion, if (and this is a big ‘if’) seed were re-branded under the concept of a community token owned by a community and you could get it to exchange, then onto a gateway like coinpayments.net, I could integrate payment transfers peer to peer into the clear-net site quite easily and turn the machine on, because all it is waiting for right now is banking. That is basically it in a nutshell. Then we have a money machine where anyone can trade their stuff peer to peer with seed. If we don’t do that, all we need to do is just accept other types of cryptocoins other than seed. We can do that right now, it just requires about 3k-4k in software banking and payment gateways.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that every ICO is in danger of the same thing here, I would guess because there is no real clear standard on how to develop new concepts on top of the blockchain. However, the ones that seem to have the most success are the ones that are the most transparent and community-oriented. The humanity here is that Tim really is a good person - I believe that. However angry any of us may be at his mishandling of funds, perhaps he should have had more help distributing those funds from the start. So I leave this with all of you to decide.
I’m glad to see this here to make it clear that there are no ‘scammers’ here, despite clear issues that will need to be resolved to move forward, one way or another.
Losing money is not important to me, losing great people in this community and projects that could have been on the SAFE Network is way more important. It’s absolutely not easy to build on cutting edge tech, unless your willing to burn money, fix all the bugs and repeat it over and over again. If anything, I think that @we_advance learned future project creators a valuable lesson, also have your token on an exchange. To some people that might seem irrelevant, but when your token is being traded it can sometimes also go up in value and give you a longer run way (SAFEX, is the living proof of this on bittrex). Some project founders also wisely diversify their tokens, directly after their crowdsale.
I love the project and like the man for being a pioneer.
app.bancor.network is specifically for community currencies, it would help incredibly with exposure (drawback is that the tokens need to become Ethereum based), it would give instant liquidity and enable an decentralize exchange of the token.
Hopefully we can get the project up and running again…