Each donor corresponds to a family, they have families, parents, and children. All donations are their hard-earned money. Since the mission of the dao has been completed, please refund the remaining money to us.
4 Likes
Which could be this DAO or intended to get the DAO back on its feet. Are you doing anything to help that process?
That would be great. But thereâs no indication of that. The DAO isnât a foundation and itâs not controlled by Julian. Everything weâve heard, in fact, has been that they canât return the money to the DAO. And per Harry Halpin, Wau Holland already said that canât happen. âAs Wau explained to me, a DAO is not a tax-privileged organization, the funds cannot directly come back to the DAOâ
Iâve been trying - but then you said to âtake a breakâ because we need to know what Julian wants. Wau Holland Stiftung wonât answer questions. Proposals arenât being put up for a vote. Multisigs arenât participating in discussions. Gabriel is busy and left the chats.
Why, what are you doing to help the process and the community? Other than telling people to âtake a breakâ and leaving Telegram and deleting your account after removing a lot of your comments I mean. (Or making allegations you wonât support about allegedly defunct, allegedly removed reports, and alleged expectations about what people expectations, etc.)
I wouldnât go there, I have so many of your twttter posts defaming Julian Assange. You donât belong here.
So instead of answering any of the questions or backing up any of your claims, itâs more dodging - and a threat? Niiice.
And oh noes. Posts of me criticizing him? And I suppose youâll make a big deal out of some of them having been deleted, along with almost all of my tweets? Well, I guess⌠Go ahead and post them. Make a bigger deal out of it. Give me a reason to post documentation.
Worst case for me? You have a years old deleted tweet where maybe I made a mistake, and Iâll admit it and retract the already deleted tweet because I donât claim a hundred percent perfection.
(Edited to remove unnecessary and unproductive snark etc.)
Maybe you should talk to the admins here? Theyâre reasonable, theyâve tidied up a few things that you felt were off. If Iâm disruptive, theyâll talk to me or if Iâve broken the forum rules outright, theyâll ban me.
Nobody is compelled to answer your questions.
Iâll answer one though. The real reason I deleted Telegram is I donât like Telegram. I made that clear from the outset. Of course you made that sound nefarious.
I asked you to stop relaying my posts to other platforms (another reason I deleted it - remember I said you have a chilling effect?) but you showed zero respect and continued anyway.
Funny enough you didnât include that reasonable request when you wrote anyone of your articles.
I said it was bad form to relay peopleâs private DMs yet you you dismiss that too.
No idea why youâre banging on about housing prices and rent free in Australia. Unless you are surveilling people?
I didnât make it sound nefarious, I just said it as something you did. Of course, you didnât have to delete your account - you could have deleted the app and kept the account so you could return and participate in the community.
They were publicly posts that anyone could see even without joining the group. You had no expectation of privacy. What you asked is no different than someone saying something in a public space and then afterwards asking it to be off the record.
Actually I took a vote and went with what the community unanimously said. Itâs not my fault you refused to vote despite repeated invitations.
It was a joke (edited out well before your post) about living rent free in your head because youâre saving all my posts. Iâm not sure why you would think that means Iâm surveilling people (I wonât read into that).
No, of course not. But is going to take your allegations seriously when they hold no water and you wonât back them up or even explain them.
But weâre off topic and just slagging each other now. Thatâs partly my fault, and for my part in getting us off topic Iâm sorry.
The AssangeDAO can receive funds indirectly. Its not a nefarious situation if the German Government have such rules. Its just unfortunate and nobody can change that.
All that is required by the DAO one day in the future is for it to put together a professional team to invest, market and administer. That would get it back on its feet.
I havenât given up hope - but Iâm aware that this process is not going to happen until likely in the New Year. So what more can be done at this point? None of the background stuff is impacted by any members at this stage.
All members have stated they wish for funds to return, they would love to see Assangeâs imput and realistically thatâs what weâre going to have to wait for.
I do. Donât go all legalistic, to suit yourself.
No one said or implied it would be nefarious.
From âwhat are you doing to helpâ to ânothing more can be done at this pointâ and the only thing that changed is whether we were talking about me or you. Okay then.
As a private individual going about your private, personal life? Sure. As a volunteer for the DAO (a public organization) making comments about the DAO in public spaces? No, you donât. Standard journalistic practice is that you canât decide after the fact that itâs off the record or a private comment.
I never reported anything about your personal or private life. AFAIK, I never even reported your actual name.
âYouâre not allowed to report anything I sayâ is literally just censorship.
Thatâs a Telegram label. It is entirely meaningless.
It is unethical. Go spread private DMs and thought bubbles of members with other organisations you work with like DDoS and see how far it gets you on a trustworthiness scale with those people. Should people divulge anything around when your present?
As for extra privileges (alleged below) - none, absolutely none. Not a single position.of authority - no moderation capability, no twitter account access - nothing of the sort. Not once, not ever.
And what a pitiful thing to do - when those people donât realise how far back youâve hated on Julian. Youâre not being transparent at all. If they support Amir they should be asking themselves why did Amir say you are dangerous.
You were granted and accepted extra privileges as part of your role in AssangeDAO. Thatâs not meaningless.
I didnât post your private DMs, PT. Again, they were public posts that anyone could see without even joining the group.
Responding to your edited version of the text for BZ, which were DMs: I took a vote of the organization in question, and went with the unanimous results.
Now, can we get back on topic? Or are you gonna keep complaining that you were quoted after you publicly posted things?
(Edited to remove unproductive, repetitive comment)
Well I look forward to your reveal on DDoS interchanges. Seeing as you see no boundary or issue with trustworthiness.
Our public posts are public, PT. What youâre asking for is already done. This is incredibly silly.
Iâm not sure what boundary you think was crossed with your public posts being re-posted.
I think itâs bad form to repeatedly edit a post and add content after itâs been replied to.
Where did Amir say this? A private chat with you? Or are you thinking of BZ saying that Gabriel said I was dangerous in the messages I posted?
Either way, maybe stop with the ad hominem attacks?
I think this will be considered strongly. The DAO massively helped to save Julianâs life. No doubt about it.
2 Likes
I suggest you go back and re read your own DMs, which you posted, thoroughly re the Amir comment.
Thanks for answering this time. Turns out you were right, according to BZ âGb&Amir all saidâ that. That same exchange shows that BZ isnât reliable, so who knows how accurate and how precise they were
being. 
(I tried posting this before but it didnât show up. Sorry if it double posts)