Active PIVXMMFund11

[Jeffrey]

Hey I answered all questions here, every time someone has questioned any proposal I’ve provided answers. With our previous Mm team Armada they had a dashboard so if you look at previous proposals I provided liquidity statements. Now there is a new dashboard and I will provide liquidity updates with new market making proposals

 

[Gerrald]

I honestly have been trying to force transparency for years and this huge control over voting has always been a problem but now instead of appeasing the previous larger holder it is now you.

Removing jeffery because you think he is Eric's pal is not something I can agree with. He works for pivx not eric. If he spoke more to eric it was probably mn votes he needed.

You have forced more transparency now use that momentum to change pivx and get the discussions going for what you think a mn owner would like to see. I would like to see more, I put thrse sort of touchy subjects in discord and got banned multiple times, still no unblocks. Multiple people have been pushed out for questioning "the team" some of which eventually did get voted out and they left or stepped back abit.

You have forced something I have been trying for years but now is not the time to remove people especially jeffery who works for peanuts and has been giving you any answers you wanted here.

Dont message him on telegram I struggle to get replies on there so keep it open on this forum then people can see if they are actually answering what mn owners want.

 

[MrAli]

Hey I answered all questions here, every time someone has questioned any proposal I’ve provided answers. With our previous Mm team Armada they had a dashboard so if you look at previous proposals I provided liquidity statements. Now there is a new dashboard and I will provide liquidity updates with new market making proposals

Thank you for this response. That is truly all that we and the community have been asking for from the beginning.

Having access to a dedicated dashboard and providing regular, verifiable liquidity updates with every new proposal will permanently eliminate doubts and clear up any past confusion around NDAs and reporting.

If this becomes the consistent standard moving forward, the entire DAO will benefit, and everyone will appreciate the clarity. We welcome this step forward.

 

[MrAli]

I honestly have been trying to force transparency for years and this huge control over voting has always been a problem but now instead of appeasing the previous larger holder it is now you.

Removing jeffery because you think he is Eric's pal is not something I can agree with. He works for pivx not eric. If he spoke more to eric it was probably mn votes he needed.

You have forced more transparency now use that momentum to change pivx and get the discussions going for what you think a mn owner would like to see. I would like to see more, I put thrse sort of touchy subjects in discord and got banned multiple times, still no unblocks. Multiple people have been pushed out for questioning "the team" some of which eventually did get voted out and they left or stepped back abit.

You have forced something I have been trying for years but now is not the time to remove people especially jeffery who works for peanuts and has been giving you any answers you wanted here.

Dont message him on telegram I struggle to get replies on there so keep it open on this forum then people can see if they are actually answering what mn owners want.

Thank you for your honesty and for sharing that background. It validates what many of us have seen from the outside for a very long time.

Let me be entirely clear: I have zero intention of purging or removing anyone. In fact, I believe it is long overdue to welcome back and re-engage the talented contributors who were pushed out, silenced, or banned under that past atmosphere.

I acknowledge Jeffrey's dedication. I have respected his work and I have never had any desire to harm him or create an operational vacuum. My stance was never personal against Jeffrey. But the era of Eric's gatekeeping and intimidation had to end. Sidelining contributors on baseless claims, hollowing out community initiatives, and forcing people into subservience just to get basic funding was toxic for PIVX.

Thank you for bringing these points to light. Let us put the hostility behind us and move forward together with transparency.

Starting from the next funding cycle, we intend to step back and act as watchful observers rather than exercising heavy voting power. We have thoroughly mapped and audited the network; all the backroom wallets, clusters, and movements are fully visible to our systems. While we may not attach a personal name to every address, we have complete architectural visibility over the blockchain.

Since we firmly believe that no single entity should unilaterally dictate the direction of this DAO, we will practice what we preach. We will let the community govern and steer proposals organically, and our voting weight will only ever be deployed if a critical need or threat to the ecosystem arises.

Let us build, bring people back, and restore PIVX to its rightful place.

 

[Jeffrey]

Thank you for this response. That is truly all that we and the community have been asking for from the beginning.

Having access to a dedicated dashboard and providing regular, verifiable liquidity updates with every new proposal will permanently eliminate doubts and clear up any past confusion around NDAs and reporting.

If this becomes the consistent standard moving forward, the entire DAO will benefit, and everyone will appreciate the clarity. We welcome this step forward.

All good that will be the standard going forward. As I said I want the best for PIVX and have been doing this for years.

All swap partners such as ChangeNow and changelly are back online now. I’m here to keep building PIVX

Thank you for your support @Gerald

 

[MrAli]

I honestly have been trying to force transparency for years and this huge control over voting has always been a problem but now instead of appeasing the previous larger holder it is now you.

Removing jeffery because you think he is Eric's pal is not something I can agree with. He works for pivx not eric. If he spoke more to eric it was probably mn votes he needed.

You have forced more transparency now use that momentum to change pivx and get the discussions going for what you think a mn owner would like to see. I would like to see more, I put thrse sort of touchy subjects in discord and got banned multiple times, still no unblocks. Multiple people have been pushed out for questioning "the team" some of which eventually did get voted out and they left or stepped back abit.

You have forced something I have been trying for years but now is not the time to remove people especially jeffery who works for peanuts and has been giving you any answers you wanted here.

Dont message him on telegram I struggle to get replies on there so keep it open on this forum then people can see if they are actually answering what mn owners want.

Regarding Eric, let me also make our position crystal clear: I have no personal vendetta, and I will not be the initiator or author of any proposal targeting him or anyone else.

If the community and active contributors believe that a formal vote or referendum on his ongoing advisory role is appropriate and necessary for the health of the project, anyone in the community has the right to draft and submit that proposal for the DAO to decide.

If a proposal of that nature is created, we will exercise our legitimate voting rights like any other masternode owner in alignment with the best interests of the network. But the initiative must come organically from the community, not as a personal crusade from us.

We believe in decentralized consensus, not individual decrees.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

Regarding Eric, let me also make our position crystal clear: I have no personal vendetta, and I will not be the initiator or author of any proposal targeting him or anyone else.

If the community and active contributors believe that a formal vote or referendum on his ongoing advisory role is appropriate and necessary for the health of the project, anyone in the community has the right to draft and submit that proposal for the DAO to decide.

If a proposal of that nature is created, we will exercise our legitimate voting rights like any other masternode owner in alignment with the best interests of the network. But the initiative must come organically from the community, not as a personal crusade from us.

We believe in decentralized consensus, not individual decrees.

Dude. That's not how the DAO works. Governance votes are for the flow of funds only. I was never voted in, and I can never be voted out. Same for everyone, including yourself.

I get that you're upset. But, that's just because I speak the truth, and you don't want to hear the truth. That's a YOU problem.

PIVX is a Meritocracy. You are fighting to make yourself a Dictator. It won't work. Many have tried. All have failed.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

Re:


Please share that information for Transparency.

Hello.

This is my second time asking that you share the data for Transparency.

Re: "We have conducted an extensive on-chain audit across the entire PIVX network. We have analyzed historical treasury payouts, wallet flows, and voting patterns, and we have identified very peculiar anomalies. My questions are not emotional attacks—they are grounded strictly in verifiable blockchain data."

Such a statement should be supported with the data and methods used. Especially since you've made so many mistakes in the past with your interpretations. Once the Community sees the data and methods, they can add clarity to it.

Thanks.