Future Council Picks for Stephen Chia

Hi NEM community,

I got really interesting telegram message from NEMber and I’d like to share it with you

Stephen Chia | NEM.io, [07.12.18 XX:XX]

Dear Everyone:

This is to let everyone know that the Foundation Exco has finally decided to announce the voting for the Elections 2019/2020 Council either today or tomorrow. For some of you who have registered, you have until Dec 14th to cast your vote on the blockchain, so there is no hurry to cast the votes immediately.

Some of you who registered but may not eligible to vote, due to the decision by the Foundation Council that those whose memberships were from funded wallets. Nevertheless, you still have the option to be members of the Foundation at a later time.

As you know, this would be an important election to elect an effective NEM Foundation Council serving for next 2 years. As part of my candicacy at President, I am putting together a team that I believe would be suitable to lead NEM in the next 2 years.

This is the PROPOSED COUNCIL 2019/2020 LINE UP

President - Stephen Chia (SEA)

VicePresident - Nelson Valero (ANZ)

Secretary - Jason Lee (ANZ)

Treasurer - Dona Rinon (UAE)

Council Members :

1. Hiroki Koga "Ninja" (Japan)

2. Steve Li (China)

3. Pedro Gutierrez (LATAM)

4. Anton Bosenko (East EU)

5. Emerson Fonseca (Phillipines)

6. William Tan (Singapore)

Instructions to cast your votes should be released soon.

Let’s make your vote count. Thanks for the support._©

I think NEM community can ask Stephen about it.

Questions from my side:

  1. Why there is no Jeff in your list? Jeff has been VP, advisor, spokesperson, original founding member and helped with voting tool and Nanowallet. It seems to be Jeff has done nothing for NEM, yeah?

  2. Why do you like people who support paid voices publicly ? Tell me who your teammates are and I will tell you who you are ©

  3. Why does the proposed Council consist of Stephen’s direct reports? I’m not sure about your list, but I think lots of them (maybe all) report you directly.



1 Like

Each one has a right to his own choice, but definitely some changes in my list.
Jeff would be an obvious choice for plenty of reasons.


+1 Jeff always


@schia is no where to be found on these forums answering questions … yet running for president? :thinking:


NEM is owned by the community, not the Foundation. So ultimately it will be the community that decides who best represents a balanced perspective/skill set on the Council. I don’t agree with this proposed list. It shuts out American/European candidates, skews towards male candidates, ignores those that have significantly contributed to NEM’s developer tools, and is heavily weighted on SE Asia and yes, Stephen’s own current direct reports.

Also, this proposed list is compromised of some that were anti-POI and that paid for memberships.

Also as pointed out above, why not include Jeff? He has been one of the few constant contributors since 2014. From being VP to global events to Nanowallet to the voting tool and even the NEM community fund. He also contributed to the Catapult roadmap.

I personally hope the community chooses a more fair, balanced and diverse Council (than what is proposed above) that has a proven track record of supporting the global community and ecosystem.

Also: Coming back to this, it’s late on a Friday night and it’s Jeff who is knee deep in code testing out the Nanowallet alongside Crypto Tony, Mark Price, Sergi, Istvan and CoE to make sure the Nanowallet is good to go for voting on Monday. I think this speaks volumes to Jeff’s character.


we have to remove that from being a president and hire your friends.

here it is about fair and, if possible, well-divided elections in terms of nationality, male or female gender and for their contribution to the foundation and, more than ever, their responsibility



Since the European arm is the only one to have contributed properly to actual development by the sounds of it, and the US arm is barely getting warmed up this proposal is at least a nice heads up to not vote for said lineup.

I’m profoundly uninterested in jolly initiatives in Cebu or whatever, and that doesn’t need council membership anyway.

It’s time to start delivering actual public chain progress and only the Western end of things looks like it’s remotely interested in doing that for now.

And I don’t care if that unbalances demographics either. If results don’t arrive soon then even more time and opportunity has been thrown away for reasons we’re not being told about. That’s no longer good enough, not that it ever was.

Public Catapult is a hump that MUST be gotten over.

1 Like

How can you put together a “team” when none of these candidates have even been elected yet?

The community will decide who gets in the team, thats the whole point of the election.
There is at least one person I dont want to see on that list, going by the stuff ive seen them post on social media.


Thanks for yet another good support for NEM - for posting this “proposed line-up”. (Which I obviously don’t support).
Could you disclose the source of the Telegram message and/or perhaps underline it with a screenshot?
Else, it stays unclear where it’s from and whether it’s authentic (from Stephen). Thanks!

1 Like

Hey @r3n3 I don’t think this was meant to be secret. Stephen also posted it in NEM Malaysia channel. I’m also member in there. Here is link: https://t.me/NEMMalaysia

Haha, that’s intreseting. I do agree that Jeff McDonald should on this list. Jeff had done a lot for NEM.
Also I don’t know whether others is reporting to Stephen, I’m not reporting to Stephen.
NEM China is an independent region, as Regional Head of NEM China I am reporting to the foundation council and foundation President Kristof.

  • jeff

I would have a council and Exco with gender and geographic diversity , and with a few positions taken from outside Foundation.
Good luck to all candidates!


Reminder about core devs concerns/comments.

who contributes in real?

Foundation, in general, has underperformed. EU is only region that has staffed global CoE. Other regions have shifted to catapult focus much sooner than SEA.

why you’re focusing on SEA?

Because SEA is the only region that is praising itself about what a great job it is doing. Yet, when asked for specifics, there is little in real results. Additionally, SEA typically does not cooperate with global foundation initiatives (e.g. CoE) and has been one of the last regions to shift focus to catapult (although given this directive nearly a year ago).

and who unveal this measures to regions from the top to discuss it now

I imagine the foundation and SEA region have some way of measuring its performance? What are these metrics? Are goals being achieved? Who knows?


What does foundation do?

It seems to spend a lot of time opening blockchain centers and traveling to conferences. No ROI of such investments have been provided. In fact, most of the foundation’s finances are too opaque.

How is foundation participating in catapult development?

…. Outside of the EU region, no catapult support has been provided. This is really an indictment of all the other regions, excepting the newly established NA region….


Conversation from Telegram chat

Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io, [08.12.18]
[In reply to Stephen Chia | NEM.io]

I think it’s good to share more why you’re looking at this specific line up. There’s a thread in the forums about this. Might be good to post there too? https://forum(.)nem(.)io/t/future-council-picks-for-stephen-chia/21047/11 I’ve been thinking a lot about the right balance and perspectives for the Council as well. I’m curious to see who the community picks… I’m sure the community will ask about this in the AMAs next week with various team members. It would be good to get you joining in on the AMAs as well. :slight_smile:

Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

@schia48 I’m also curious why you didn’t include Jeff? I strongly disagreed on not including him. He’s an obviously strong choice from the perspective of connecting with community, many technical contributions, Council experience, being an entreprenuer, contributing to the roadmap, owning multiple Supernodes, contributing since 2014, works well with our core devs, as well as strong partnerships with companies large and small.

Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

Jeff is also the one staying up late with me and others testing the Nanowallet before elections. So his dedication to this process is unwavering.

Rene B [ACCESS Blockchain (MY) / LuxTag.io], [08.12.18]

I’d like to see a bit more if global balance. Stephen’s proposal includes no EU nor North America candidates.

Which is already now one of the downsides of the NEM Foundation.

We need to be less Asia(-only) centric.

Rene B [ACCESS Blockchain (MY) / LuxTag.io], [08.12.18]

(Says the “Malaysian” Rene :crazy_face::joy:)

Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

Truthfully, I was hoping Jeff would run for President. It really should have been him in the role all along. If we can’t have him for President, then I’ll happily push for Council because he will lift the entire Council up.

Stephen Chia | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

[In reply to Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io]

No doubt, Jeff has contributed greatly to the formation of the Foundation as well as the community in the past 2 years. And there is also reasons why he stepped down as VP previously. I believe his move back from Korea to the US would help lift NorthAmerica region which has been stalled due to absence of strong leadership there, until now with you at the helm. Its a big job, and I doubt its a single person, but a team that can grow NEM there.

Stephen Chia | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

[In reply to Rene B [ACCESS Blockchain (MY) / LuxTag.io]]

I guess everyone is entitled to their views on this, but my proposed line up is based upon whom I believe is able to get the Foundation back up and running effectively, to achieve the kind of goals we need to get done in 2019/2020.

Alexandra Tinsman | NEM.io, [08.12.18]

[In reply to Stephen Chia | NEM.io]

Jeff stepping down had to do with politics, not ability. He’ll be just fine helping the council achieve great things in 2019 and beyond. I bet a lot of our community agree and will vote accordingly. Please join our AMAs next week. It is nice to see you speaking up more in our social channels.

My conclusion about the conversation between Alex/Rene and Stephen above:

  1. Stephen and his “future team” have their own vision, but catapult development are not included in it. Why? Because there are no people from EU or NA, who are only supporters of catapult development.

How is foundation participating in catapult development?

…. Outside of the EU region, no catapult support has been provided. This is really an indictment of all the other regions, excepting the newly established NA region…. © Jaguar

So Stephen doesnt hear NEM core devs and their concerns.

Who are interested in delaying Catapult release? - I’d like to leave this open question for your own analysis.

  1. Stephen and his “future team” with their own vision are not the solution for current situation - huge gap between NEM community/Nem core devs/NEMdevs AND NEM Foundation.

I believe his move back from Korea to the US would help lift NorthAmerica region © Stephen

No comments…


:roll_eyes: :open_mouth: :fearful:

Months of total inaction indicates at the very least disinterest or stupidity. Malice comes next.

Whole elections process is a show with a couple of hundreds of selected voters who are funded by a group that even doesn’t want to release Catapult on NEM public chain anytime soon.

See more on my point of view on this here Misha Granin for Vice President (at least for a day, so we all can create NEM Foundation 2.0)

So John :
I guess you are making this up as you go along and arriving at your own conclusions.

What gave you the impression that SEA did not cooperate with the Foundation initiatives (eg CoE)? You seem to ignore fact is the task of the catapult roadmap development was tasked to the CoE set up in Europe way back in 2017 when Lon & Jeff and the Council then. And together with the rest of the other regions, SEA concentrated to have boots on the ground to grow NEM presence and support in the regions. Now, one & half years later… seems now the lack of Catapult development or roadmap is blamed on the other regions (especially SEA) why is that? Has anyone ever asked the question, what has the CoE Europe done during that one and half years with the mandate, and now has dwindled down to 5-6 people? Truth of the matter is the mandate or the project leadership was never given to the other regions, and was solely in the hand of EU Region.

Give us the other regions the mandate and the budget, and we WILL get Catapult roadmap done and released.

Care to explain what you mean by that? Why would be even consider to do that?

Please care to take a look at my candidate document with regards to our plans to work towards the technology roadmap and our plans to work globally to support the core devs in finishing Catapult.

1 Like

Are you implying that the current Interim President Kristof (with his current Council) has done all the hard work of ensuring the eligible voters are all properly KYCed and also qualified to vote is all for a show? And that there are still questionable “funded voters” in the current roster of voters?

By the way, Misha you still have not said thank you to me personally for clearing up the complications and mess you have created with the unfinished MOU with the Kazakhstan Space Agency, and left the Council to take corrective measures to clear NEM’s reputation there in early 2018. And I spent 2-3 weeks trying to get in touch with you after you went MIA.