What's next re donated money?

First, big congratulations on this massive donation to free Assange. Anons loudly united through blockchain technology to have a concrete impact on policies on ground, and this in itself is a success for the future of our sovereignty.

Since the max bid was placed, some forum participants claimed that they would have liked liquidity to remain in the DAO instead of given towards Assange’s fight for freedom. I believe these claims should be ignored since this was never the purpose of the DAO, and there will always be complaining trolls.

Let’s be clear, this effort is 1) experimental, and nobody can claim otherwise; 2) very successful given the amounts contributed; and 3) fulfilled all of its promises: justice minted, NFT obtained, money disbursed against the NFT which will go towards Assange’s defence.

Nonetheless, I would like to suggest here some next steps with regards to the money donated. These steps may also address some concerns voiced in the forum.

In legacy systems, donations often come hand in hand with some accountability and reporting requirements from the receiver. Here, I understand that Assange’s family is very much involved in the process. I would personally appreciate to have:

**- a bio description from the brother who made the max bid proposal here, explaining for those who do not know him personally why he should be trusted, namely that he is safekeeping Assange’s interests and why Assange himself is trusting him

  • who is the receiving person/institution, where it is incorporated, what are their reporting requirement?

  • whether we will be kept in the loop on how the proceeds are spent. Where is the money going? How is it governed there?

  • and anything else that can reasonably be disclosed, without harming Assange’s strategies and creating unreasonable overhead. Can 40mil have no strings attached? I believe it can, but it shouldn’t, this community deserves care**

There may have been some misunderstanding on the pure direct donation aspect of this initiative (and this may have resulted from not fully reading the docs, the discord, and from a lack of centralised narratives - by design): the narrative initially put forward was (i) bidding to buy the NFT (a purchase where the proceeds are donated), in contrast with a (ii) direct donation.

Maybe (i) and (ii) are exactly the same for those who wanted to donate, and would have still given the money without the justice token, without the nft and without the reimbursement rights…

But those, if any at all, who got convinced to give because of one of these three elements may feel confused as to the direct max bid, given that this is out of the ordinary. The fact that there are several posts in the forum discussing bidding strategies, including one proposing the direct max bid, hint that some did not consider a direct max bid as the initial common strategy.

Although contributors could and should have expected, even wanted imo, the bidding to get as high as the max bid, the difference here is the lack of a counter bid which would give the illusion at least of a market for the NFT/for donating to Assange. We can assume that the market was absorbed by the DAO itself, meaning that the other interested bidders directly contributed to the DAO and therefore there was no more liquidity for a bidding fight. Fair enough: the goal is to max money for Assange.

→ To move forward and summarise, it would be nice to give information on whom is getting the money, how trustworthy they are, how they plan to spend the money for assange and how they won’t forget about those who gave. Have a process for continuous updates and a process to use this amazing community, to further help Assange in different other ways than capital contribution.

Bonus, given it’s a donation, if there can be any mechanism for tax deduction of the money donated?

Thank you for making history.


Hi! I believe the funds are going to support Assange via the Wau Holland Foundation, one of the oldest computer freedom foundaitons and one of the few that can withstand US government pressure. They were also the non-profit behind Chaos Computer Congress (Wau Holland Foundation - Wikipedia). It was the original foundation supporting Wikileaks since 2009 and will continue supporting Assange in the future. I do think the family can be transparent about how the money is being spent, so I will ask them but anyone can also them in Discord or via Twitter and family members like Gabriel and Assange’s fiancee Stella are in the chats (and I think this forum).


I agree it is important that Wau Holland Foundation shows us that the full amount of the 16k+ ETH has been received and is on their books. I also think they should provide information as to how the funds will be used - regularly. While German foundations are pretty tightly regulated, foundations that have a public benefit in accordance § 52 Abgabenordnung do not fall within the scope of the Disclosure Law and accordingly have limited or no statutory disclosure requirements. Still, just cause they do not have those obligations by law, does not mean that they have no moral obligation to provide the requested information. They do have a moral obligation.


I think if we simply ask them nicely, they might happily comply to the degree they can. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Just a question: is Wau Holland Foundation running a fundraising campaign to help Assange with his legal costs? If so, it would be nice to promote it through social media (I guess that a number of us manage pages dedicated to helping Assange on social media, so this could be a good way to advertise both their campaign and in general the goal of Wau Holland Foundation).

Re the general topic of this thread, if I understood correctly, now the DAO has donated the money collected to the WH Foundation through the auction and is now the owner of the NFT/ Censored Collection.
Through the auction a big goal like financing the legal fees has been reached, but the key point which is in the process of being achieved (but sadly still a lot needs to be done) is driving the global public opinion on Assange’s side. I thought that this could be accomplished by setting up an online exhibition where the “Censored Collection” could be seen/visited with a small entrance fee (1$ or the equivalent in ETH or any other cryptocurrency of your choice); I am confindent that the massive auction sale, which has been reported by major newspapers around the globe, has generated a lot of curiosity about the artwork itself even among those who haven’t contributed to the collection.
The money which is going to be collected this way can be used to purchase newspapers’ front pages or advertising spaces on TV/social media, etc to raise awareness about Assange’s plight and to finally spread accurate, factual and objective information after lies and smears have been spread for so long.

Surely nearly 53 million $ is going to help his defence greatly, but ultimately the best lawyer for Assange is the support of public opinion worldwide.

Sorry for the very long message and thanks everyone for your kind attention. :slight_smile:


1 Like

Sorry, I’ve just realised that my message is actually off topic. Maybe an administrator can delete it (being my first post, I don’t know how to do this).

I don’t believe that public opinion really matters, unless it is expressed in a way, that imposes a cost on the leadership or operations of a country, for example the Trucker Convoy in Canada as an example. The governmental system is filled with a deep state of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, and unfortunately Assange’s freedom will be more than likely determined by those bureaucrats, considering they can use “national security” concerns to prevent the jury from hearing witnesses, or prevent defense counsel from asking certain questions of witnesses, which would require them to disclose “sensitive information”.

1 Like

Well, there is little chance that public opinion is going to mobilise as massively and effectively as they have done with the Trucker Convoy in Canada if they hear about Assange every now and then and most of what they hear is either fabrications or a very concise account in a “sanitized” language. This is true especially for non English speaking countries where the materials available for readers to form a balanced and exhaustive opinion about Assange’s case are very few.

In Canada, as well as in many parts of Europe, people took the streets to oppose vaccine mandates or vaccine passes, because they felt that the governments’ decisions were affecting their lives and were contrary to their interests and freedoms. We should make them aware that the same is true for the prosecution of Assange.
Western countries rely on their citizens’ acquiescence or apathy to carry out (and get away with) these sleazes; we should exploit this “leftover” of formal democracy to save Assange, because otherwise all the money in the world won’t be enough to overturn the Courts’ decisions.

Should each transaction outgoing from the Wau Holland fund be notified to the Assange DAO? Its in the interest of this group to see for transparency on how the amounts are spent. Could Wau Holland be requested to update under one of the categories - is there a Finance category?

should remove assangeDAO it should not exist in the crypto market