Proposal: Refund request from Wau Holland Foundation

There are many people who were getting ahold of me online, during a period of time in which I had to go to the hospital for intestinal bleeding, and I think I have formulated a proposal that should be addresses their concerns, which should be voted on as soon as governance is complete.

The DAO should state to the Wau Holland Foundation, that because of negligence with regards to the brokering of the NFT auction, that a portion of the proceeds should be refunded to the DAO. Specifically, that the type of auction for the NFT was not specified, and it does not even appear that there is a general name for the type of auction used for the NFT. Normally the highest bidder pays only as much as the 2nd highest bidder, and this would result in a much lower payment to the Wau Holland Foundation.

Once the grievance is presented to the Wau Holland Foundation, I believe they ought to understand the nature of the problem, and I hope they take steps to remedy it.

9 Likes

We should do so, if this proposal is rejected outright. The current management is a dictator.

6 Likes

It’s good for the dao,I support

4 Likes

I’ve responded to some comments on the distribution by Wau Holland in the community call thread.

2 Likes

sir,Do you mean to use the family unit’s veto power?

4 Likes

Very supportive of your proposal.

3 Likes

support support support

1 Like

This is a good idea. We should let everyone participate in the discussion and decide together

2 Likes

(post deleted by author)

1 Like

You will be punished by law and just trial

1 Like

Very good proposal, so can we act now?

1 Like

Very good proposal, support

1 Like

Totally agree. Otherwise this DAO will die. In discord, all we’ve been talking about is how to make it better for a month. Talking won’t help anything. Part of the community argued that it doesn’t matter how much the token costs. In the end, it turns out that you need money from the treasury to do something for the community. What a twist.
All these ideas of making another collection nft for the community are garbage. No one will mint, after collecting 50 million from the auction. No one needs it.
The community already has the lowest reputation. And to raise it, let the foundation do something for the community.
I don’t think they need all those millions at the moment. And I don’t think that part of the return will do anything terrible.

1 Like

This proposal is a pipe dream. To date, Gabriel Shipton is the only one who has gotten any of Pak’s $55 million donation back out of Wau Holland Foundation—a brokerage commission fee of $1,838,126.27 paid to Gabriel’s Australian association ASSANGE CAMPAIGN INC. Today, in his Discord AMA, Gabriel made clear that no refund to AssangeDAO is going to happen until AssangeDAO gets its act together and formulates a clear path towards continuing viability. It is especially important, he said, that AssangeDAO be able to explain in detail how the requested refund is to be spent.

3 Likes

Today, in his Discord AMA, Gabriel made clear that no refund to AssangeDAO is going to happen until AssangeDAO gets its act together and formulates a clear path towards continuing viability.

I was not able to attend this meeting, because some member of the discord, likely Ewillhelpyou, had banned me.

He should come here to communicate that directly.

I would like to point out, that he has the financial responsibility for the problems that were caused due in part to his own negligence in brokering the NFT auction. Moreover he is in privity with each of the parties in the transactions, with the original DAO team and retaining a veto in organization that bought the NFT, association with the creator of the NFT, the charitable recipient of the funds from the sale, and the australian organization paid by the charity.

I don’t believe that the members of the DAO should need to justify what its going to spend a refund on, in order to request a refund of money that was originally theirs in the first place. However I think that considering his criticism, if that criticism implies that they refunded money will be misspent, that perhaps the correct method of implementing the refund, is to refund those wallets who contributed to the DAO on a pro-rata basis minus whatever position they sold at, in addition to the relinquishment of all complaints over the money and then dissolving the DAO.

Given that I was told about death threats and legal threats by persons who feel defrauded, and the inherent problems, dysfunction, in the DAO, that it may be preferable to do this than deal with yet another international cross border legal controversy.

1 Like

Yes, E definitely has the authority on Discord AssangeDAO to ban you, which would be consistent with his accusing you on the Feb 14 AssangeDAO Jitsi call of being “an IC plant” and later on Telegram smearing you and Amir as “controlled assets.” This is the level of E’s paranoia that AssangeDAO must be wary of. E is the worst possible choice to lead AssangeDAO out of its present environment of distrust.

Mod level

3 Likes

My perception from him, is the same sort of paranoid Qanon types, based on a search of some online archives I have done. He makes statements that are so verifiably false, and it makes me think that he is either crazy and believes these things, or that he is sociopath who manipulates people for his own purpose.

Unfortunately, E reminds me of a person that I have had personally known through internet activism named Lane Davis aka Seattle4Truth, who was driven so crazy from his online sleuthing and reporting that he killed his own father, because everything became a part of one big conspiracy to the extent that even his own dad was part of it.

1 Like

image

1 Like

But we would not want it to be lower!!! If Assange is extradited - the US legal system will very much wipe that amount of funding, especially because this is going to be a prolonged case.

I think Gabriel Shipton made it clear yesterday in a response to me that the Wau Holland fund is only to be used for Assange’s legal fight. Only the family can apply for any funding

I think the FAQ section needs to be updated to explain this stuff as there is so much confusion/frustration.

1 Like

I think Gabriel Shipton made it clear yesterday in a response to me that the Wau Holland fund is only to be used for Assange’s legal fight. Only the family can apply for any funding

I think the FAQ section needs to be updated to explain this stuff as there is so much confusion/frustration.

What I am implying, is that Gabriel Shipton, through his role in setting up the NFT auction, misled investors, who are now wanting a refund. Specifically there was never a disclosure about what kind of auction the NFT was going to have in the first place. This led to much dispute about “max bid”, because the type of auction was not disclosed before hand, and a “max bid” would leave the DAO with no funds. Normally a “max bid” is normal, and the winner pays the 2nd highest bidders price, not the full amount of the bid, think for example how Ebay works.

A part of the reasons why there are these S.E.C. disclosure rules, is so that people aren’t misled and know what is going to happen in the future when they invest. unfortunately a lot of people feel that they were misled, some people invested and they didn’t get any Justice tokens at all, and the entire core team has left except Silke Noa, and some people are so angry as to make death threats and legal threats over this. Thus the best way to resolve the conflict may very well be to just refund the portion of the donation which was more than the second highest bidder, and just close the DAO.

1 Like