Active PIVXMMFund11

[MrAli]

@KYMAVR Thank you for this constructive response and for drafting the V1 Reporting Template. This is precisely the kind of practical governance standard PIVX needs.

First, I want to clarify an important point: I have not cast a single NO vote against the market-making proposals, nor have I sought to defund our liquidity gateway.My nodes have not blocked this cycle. From day one, my position has been strictly about governance and transparency, not obstruction.

A simple, standardized report like the one you just proposed is all I have ever asked for. It does not require complex legal disclosures or breaching NDAs; it is simply basic accounting: what was received, what was paid to the vendor, and what remains deployed as working capital.

Unfortunately, instead of receiving a simple, straightforward answer, I was met with hostility, defensiveness, and personal attacks simply for asking where community funds are allocated. In any professional financial environment, asking for a balance sheet is standard diligence, not an attack.

I welcome your proposed template wholeheartedly. I am not here to litigate the past or derail momentum—I am here to ensure that as PIVX scales and the market rotates into privacy, new serious capital entering this ecosystem finds a transparent, mature, and accountable DAO they can trust.

If Jeffrey and the team commit to adopting this turnkey template and providing this clear breakdown, we are completely aligned. Let’s move forward together with transparency.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

Unfortunately, instead of receiving a simple, straightforward answer, I was met with hostility, defensiveness, and personal attacks simply for asking where community funds are allocated. In any professional financial environment, asking for a balance sheet is standard diligence, not an attack.

Correct. I am not sure if it translates well, but we have a saying; "People respond in kind." That's what happened.

Example; You attacked @Jeffrey 's reputation related to the 15 days the funds were not deployed for liquidity to MEXC.

You could have said something like; "Hey! Why haven't the MEXC funds for Liquidity been deployed yet? Did I miss something?"

But, that's not the approach you took. You went into attack mode. Then, @Jeffrey gave you a perfect reason, which you could easily verify externally. Instead, you ignored that answer THREE TIMES and continued the attack. "People respond in kind."

Let me be clear; I want to see liquidity grow. I want to see detailed proposals and regular reports on those proposals. This applies to all proposals.

But, TRUST is the most important thing here. People might not always perform at the level we want. That might be because the effort required is too much for a person, which can be resolved by adding resources, or they lack skills, which can be resolved with training, direction, or tools being provided. But once TRUST is broken, it can be near impossible to recover from.

@KYMAVR has provided an excellent example of adding resources with the offer; "I would be more than happy to help draft a simple, standardized reporting template for the MM funds next cycle to take the administrative load off the core team."

However, the words, methods and style you use @MrAli , is attacking the TRUST that @Jeffrey has built up over 10+ years. No one is perfect. We can all improve. But, please RESPECT the team. Everyone has sacrificed a lot and still is. PIVX is dead if these people leave, and PIVX simply CAN'T GROW if new people considering joining, see such unjustified disrespect.

Please do better.