What's new

Awaiting Feedback PIVX Starter - Easy & Transparent Crypto Crowdfunding

Borris

Pivian
All discussions were done in the same chat chekaz is in. He may not have read the letter but everything was discussed and you have the letter to how the solicitor said to proceed with it.

Bought/vendible were involved in this as they had the license needed.

I assume that the proposal is for the source code and for chekaz to adapt the current one to whatever specifications the foundation would require. Blockcurators GmbH made the site which chekaz is part of.

As always someone else could just create it from scratch if that's something PIVX wants to use but there is already a working although not to kyc standard already in working order which blockcurators will adapt to however it is needed. That is what is on offer.

Either way it's just an option. If it is not wanted that's fine but I think it could be good.
 
Last edited:

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
Re: "I assume that the proposal is for the source code and for chekaz to adapt the current one to whatever specifications the foundation would require."

@ChekaZ Please confirm that the price includes exclusive ownership rights to the source code.
 

ChekaZ

New Pivian
PIVX will get the rights on the SourceCode after the payment is done. One exception is that TZC will keep the on premise use rights. Besides that the source code wont be sold to anyone.
 

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
The PIVX Foundation does not want or need this, and has never entertained the idea.

The PIVX Treasury can't donate to the PIVX Foundation, because donors must do KYC and the Treasury is not a person or legal entity.

Further, the PIVX Foundation serves PIVX, not the other way around.

Given all that, do you see any possible way that this can move forward? If so - how?
 

Totenfluch

New Pivian
Given all that, do you see any possible way that this can move forward? If so - how?
If KYC is an issue, we could decentralize the backend and let it run over the pivx chain using about the same methods as the proposals do.
Otherwise I don't see a way to move forward here.
 

Borris

Pivian
If KYC is an issue, we could decentralize the backend and let it run over the pivx chain using about the same methods as the proposals do.
Otherwise I don't see a way to move forward here.
Another use case for the MNs? Not sure how it would work but watching 👀
 

Totenfluch

New Pivian
Another use case for the MNs? Not sure how it would work but watching 👀
I personally would only use MNs to release % of the piv on the milestone completions.
Otherwise only use it to propagate the funding proposal on the chain which is then displayed in pivxstarter where everyone can donate by just sending piv to the address.
However this would take significantly more development.
 

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
Summary:

1. Both @ChekaZ and @Borris have no idea how to proceed with this project legally.

2. This proposal is basically asking for funds to finish the project the way 'PIVX' wants.

3. This of course is an unknown, so additional funds would likely be required for development and legal consulting.

4. There is no one willing to Project Manage this effort.

5. There needs to be someone to be legally responsible, and to set up a legal entity for it. We have no idea who would do this.

6. The legal entity needs to have accounts with Stripe/PayPal/Vendible to do proper KYC/AML for donors. If it is Vendible, the donor can send PIVX. Otherwise it must be fiat - defeating the purpose - and forcing a name change to 'FIATstarter'.

7. The legal entity must meet GDPR requirements and accept the risk of not doing that properly.

8. The legal entity may need to adjust often given maturing regulations on privacy coins.

These are all major showstoppers. Even each on their own are pretty much impossible to resolve.

These are all conveniently omitted from this Pre-Proposal.


As Borris has discussed at length in Discord, reports on proposals are very important for transparency. Yet, here in this proposal, many very important facts are completely ignored. That is not just unethical, but is also pretty disgusting. Clearly reports are great, but do not solve the problem. What does ensure accountability is people getting involved, and asking tough questions.

So, this Pre-Proposal is Dead On Arrival, and there is no possible way of ever launching this.

Knowing all this, means moving forward with this Pre-Proposal is simply an attempt to 'leech' funds out of PIVX as a ‘cash-grab’. Nothing more.
 

ChekaZ

New Pivian
Its not even set up for a proposal, its set up for discussion, it may never be a proposal but this is probably the best sub-forum to discuss it.

- "Many important facts are ignored" Huh? - Its a working product in the end, its already working, so what kind of information do you miss? You can already test all its features except the KYC one. So about the reporting/information you maybe just have to try it out?

What facts are omitted? You dont get the point of the forum I guess, we are discussing how it CAN be done, its not finished, nothing was decided yet, its not set up.

So sure lots of your points regarding the legal stuff are relevant and should be discussed, if we want to move forward, otherwise we just dont and its fine too, thats why its getting discussed. I think thats how it should work here? We didnt set it up as a proposal overnight and put 500000 votes on it and then say "Hey lets discuss"

Your response is immature.
 
Last edited:

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
It is currently illegal to run the service as described. I listed all the problems. Those were known but omitted. That's not cool.
You are suggesting you be paid almost $4,000 for completing something that no one will be able to operate.
These are the facts.
I am just being rational.
It would be a complete waste of funds unless the legal issues are first resolved.
 

Borris

Pivian
It is currently illegal to run the service as described. I listed all the problems. Those were known but omitted. That's not cool.
You are suggesting you be paid almost $4,000 for completing something that no one will be able to operate.
These are the facts.
I am just being rational.
It would be a complete waste of funds unless the legal issues are first resolved.
That's why it's being discussed. Can vendible be involved? Is there another service that would provide what is needed? I don't know. Be good to get other people's eyes on it to see how it could come about? If not atleast there was discussions of why it can or can't be used.
 
Top