Manfred G von Nostitz for Council

Dear NEM Community Members,

I am a Canadian of European origin, with decades of international government and private sector experience. Although I have spent most of my career in the Asia-Pacific region I am not Asia-centric. Thus notwithstanding that I am based in Malaysia, I consider it essential that the NEM Foundation in order to thrive must become a strong global organization beyond its founding cradle in Southeast Asia, with key support pillars in North America, Europe, East Asia and as well in the future the Middle East, Latin America and Africa.

As a NEM member for one year, I am running for Council because on the basis of my experience I can make some value-added contributions and “impact on the sustainability and future of the NEM Foundation”. Please consider my following comments in conjunction with my candidate policy document, now publicly available to all NEM community members:

The NEM Presidency

The NEM Foundation rightly aspires to be a global organization. However based on my international experience, this goal cannot be achieved if a successor President – no matter how good the candidate — is elected again from Malaysia or even Southeast Asia, together with a VP candidate who is also standing for election from this region.

Such a Presidency will inevitably consign the Foundation to a parochial regional fiefdom with narrow local terms of reference and inward-looking staff without the requisite inter-regional or global experience.

With this kind of succession, NEM will have a diminished international profile and a major image problem, thereby not only devaluing the XEM but also other regions will be alienated and downgraded in their influence, motivation and commitment. For these reasons, no other national entity, whether it be government, corporate, banking, NGOs or the UN ever adheres to this practice and NEM should not be the exception

Thus if elected, I would press to put in place a formal restriction prohibiting a VP and a President coming from the same region. In international organizations or corporations, this is regarded as a sine qua non, a major impediment to effectively operate as a global entity and this is why NEM should also rule out such an option. I would also recommend for consideration by members, to formally decree, in line with international practice, that the Presidency must be rotated i.e. that no one region can hold the Presidency more than one term in a row.

Based on this rationale, I will vote and I advocate voting for Alexandra Tinsman as President. She is not only an ideal candidate with all the mandatory credentials but she also credibly represents North America, which must become an essential substantive platform for NEM to achieve a higher valuation and international credibility.


The prevailing governance in NEM ranging from ethics, to accountability and financial transparency has been inadequate, as well as lacking in clarity and consistency, as was recently reflected in what some members were labeling a flawed and too-protracted run-up to the electoral process.

When governance is dodgy in any organization, trust is corroded between members and management and inexorably arguments and disputes surface with a toxicity evident now in NEM over the voting process. It pulls the whole organization down. Having taken part in a wide variety of boards, I have proven experience in this field and if elected as Councilor, one of my foremost priorities would be to help draft a revised set of Foundation guidelines or bylaws based on consultations with the community, that set down clearly on paper, rules that must be consistently applied and enforced without manipulation, fear or favor.

Right up front I would also recommend revamping the current provision that allows Council decisions taken by majority vote, to be blocked by minority dissenters. There is no board in the world that allows such terms because it stymies any decision-making power of a governing body. The Council must be a majority decision-making governing body that cannot afford to be paralyzed by minority dissent.

The Overriding Importance of Technology

NEM’s success is rated and judged on the quality and cutting-edge of its technology. Thus, the key people in NEM are not Councilors or Presidents but Core Developers. Not only must the best core devs be recruited and amply funded but they also have to be heard and heeded by the executives. As Councilor, I would insist that during every Council meeting one key agenda item must always be dedicated to a briefing from the core devs. Core devs have to be more integrated with the NEM decision making process for the Foundation to move forward.


We are way behind in this regard as compared to the competition which is hurting NEM’s valuation. Lack of adequate marketing means that NEM’s international profile is not commensurate with its quality technology. In today’s world, NEM cannot count on automatic recognition of this superiority. Instead, in order to stay competitive, NEM’s blockchain technology must be relentlessly marketed and advertised. As Councilor, I would press for much more effort and resources devoted to marketing, in-line with some of NEM’s main competitors, such as Ethereum or Ripple, who do this so effectively well.

Media Exposure

An obvious close corollary of marketing, is to bring about more coverage and interviews in both the mainstream and social media outlets. NEM has to be far more active not only with interviews but also with regular press briefings and releases. With interviews I have seen, except for the accomplished Alexandra Tinsman, I have found NEM executives not only lacking in impact but also at times purveying misleading or incomplete information. As Councilor, I would first recommend a drawing-up of a proactive media strategy and would insist on much better preparation for interviews. Speaking notes for any executive, pertaining to technical issues, should be vetted in advance by core devs. As Councilor, I would insist that any executive planning to be interviewed must first go through a media training program to get the NEM message out with maximum effect ---- not only with the benign but particularly with the critical mainstream or social media.


To proliferate the NEM blockchain technology, NEM cannot afford to just fly solo especially in markets like Canada where Ethereum enjoys monopolistic rule. Partnerships such as NEM has with the Blockchain Research Institute (BRI) in Toronto can facilitate cooperation and collaboration so essential to the building of blockchain solutions for governments and industry. Follow-up is essential. BRI can make available to the world wide NEM community, a wide array of research work. The BRI can also help in facilitating tie-ups with potential conversion customers. This will offer NEM a platform to promote its blockchain technology, which will establish a NEM foothold for expansion into important global markets where NEM alone does not have the capability to do so.

Manfred G von Nostitz



It is nice to see you running.

For all the NEM community, I have met Manfred and know that he has had a long and distinguished career. He is “older” than most of us, yes, but sometimes it is good to have somebody experienced and wise helping us lesser experienced nembers navigate the waters and avoid rookie mistakes.


Great insight :+1:

NEM needs someone like you on the council!


Hi Manfred.

Do you understand catapult?

1 Like

Hi GodTanu,

I do understand the critical importance of Catapult for the future sustainability and success of NEM. With its unique aggregated transaction capability and its capacity to dramatically increase the speed and scalability transactions, I value a lot that it will provide NEM with a distinctive feature that so far no other blockchain technology can claim.

What I do not understand is that the Council heretofore ----if my information is correct----has had the Catapult Road Map under consideration for several months without taking any action. I also would counsel every NEM executive to clear any public statement on Catapult first with the leading core developer to ensure that important details such as the TPS are not misrepresented to the public. If elected I would accord the completion of the Catapult project the highest priority. I would recommend that the Council should initiate immediate close consultations with the core devs and provide them with the strongest support possible to ensure that the project has the right strategy with the best professional staffing and ample funding for a successful conclusion.


I absolutely agree.

Weight of developers.
NEM is powerful becouse it was raised from scratch by developers, not managers who hired third-party developers. They are the creators of the project, they lead it from birth to today, their weight should be decisive. Managers come and go out, but core devs stay and move the project forward.

The NEM Foundation should work for developers, not the other way around.
The development of the NEM core should be in unconditional priority and the NEM Foundation should create all the conditions for core devs, be in constant contact with them, expand the development team. This is item number 1. Popularization and participation in conferences is also necessary, but these are items 2, 3, etc.

Informing the NEM community.
Also NEM is a community. It is heterogeneous, impermanent, but all of its stratums are important, both hodler and traders, and enthusiasts and third-party developers. NEM was born from the depths of the community. Therefore, there should be regular (at least once a week) reports on core development for the community. Silence for some months is not normal. I know that intensive work is under way, but to others it seems that NEM is dead. There should be more reports and development informing than meetings and conferences. This is also the task of the NEM Foundation, but it can only be solved in regular contact with the developers.

It is necessary to collect information on the course of core development bit by bit from different sources as if this is a strict military secret. Thanks to Gimre for taking the time and filling this vacuum a bit and occasionally the community received short development reports.

This information should be much more and it should be regular and more frequent. Ninja style is original for startups, and it was great in the early years, but now the scale of the project has become larger and the ninja style is slowing down the project because the connection with the NEM community and the crypto community as a whole weakens.

1 Like

Hi Manfred G von Nostitz, I’d be very appreciated if you clarify couple of points about you.

  1. What is your involvement in Xhai Studios, Xarcade (and its ICO) / DragonFly Fintech ?
  2. What is your relationship/loyalty to Lon Wong? Are you ProximaX investor? Do you get/got payments from ProximaX for any kind of service from your side?
  3. What is your opinion about using PoI mechanism for coming election?

Thanks in advance for the answers.


Dear GetCointoday,

Following are my responses to your queries:

  • Xhai Studios:

My son Otto was in charge of business development of this gaming company. I was once suggested to be Chairman of Xhai Studios but this never materialized. Although supportive I never held a formal position or had any operational involvement with this company

  • Xarcade:

Son Otto is the CEO of this company. I have had no involvement with the DSO ( not ICO) or the development of the company.

  • Lon Wong

Lon brought son Otto into NEM and co-founded Xarcade with him. This is how I met Lon and established a valued and enduring friendship with him. I admire and respect his capabilities and accomplishments. Under his aegis as President, but on my own initiative, I negotiated the NEM partnership agreement with the Blockchain Research Institute (BRI) in Canada and engaged a Thai business partner to host a NEM Hub in Bangkok.

  • Dragonfly

I was never an investor nor a partner in Dragonfly. I represented the company once at an ASEAN Canada Fintech conference in Toronto March 2017 and that is why I was listed as an adviser on the Dragonfly website. Dragonfly did not pay any expenses for this conference and I never received any kind of compensation from the company. Since that time I have had zero involvement with Dragonfly.

  • Proxima X

I am not an investor in XPX. I have never received and do not currently receive any kind of payment from Proxima X.

  • PoI Voting

I support this voting process. I am already on record that I want the Core Developers more substantively involved in the NEM decision process. In line with this view I also want them to have more weighted voting representation, commensurate with the indispensable core contributions they are making to position NEM at the forefront of the blockchain revolution.


Dear andme,

I wholly endorse your insightful comments on the importance of the developers: That the foundations priority goal must be to support these developers and keep the NEM community regularly informed of core technological developments. If elected to Council I would be committed to implement such a policy.

With regard to keeping the NEM community informed I would also apply this requirement across the board for the whole Foundation as follows:

Board of Directors

The NEM Foundation Company Act/ Constitution, mandates that the BOD “must cause minutes to be made covering the proceedings at all meetings of the company and of the Directors”; What it does not stipulate but should do so, is that these minutes should be made available to the whole NEM community.

Executive Committee (Ex-Co)

The By-Laws spell out that the President has to confirm “the correct record of committee proceedings and must sign off via the NEM blockchain notarization function” where they must be available to all the NEM members. This is not happening currently.


The Council is authorized to exercise all the powers of the company. A pretty powerful mandate. However the By-Laws do not stipulate that the deliberations and decisions of the Council have to be recorded in official minutes and disseminated. This is an important oversight which has to be corrected in the interest of accountability and transparency.

Financial Management

The By-Laws prescribe that an annual audit is required to “ascertain the correctness of the profit and loss account and balance sheet” . This is fine but not good enough when aligned against the terms of reference of the Treasurer, who merely has “responsibility to receive all monies keep all funds and disperse all monies on behalf of the company”;!

This is the most lax and unaccountable mandate I have ever seen allocated to an CFO and it should be tightened up . The Treasurer must be obligated to issue a detailed financial statement every quarter or four times a year, to be available to all community members. It has to provide details such as all general and administrative expenses, including travel, procurements, consulting fees, operating activities etc. girded with a balance sheet listing all assets and liabilities of the Foundation.


Thank you!


Hi Manfred G von Nostitz, thanks for the answers.

I asked you about connection to ProximaX, because your PDF document was apostilled by NBTOLRAMDKBZZPEUEQA25Q3VRUVAEPDUX43CMGRS (NEM-001199), who made about 200 “interesting” XPX transactions.

You policy PDF mentions only about NDJDDOCWVWTLP7Z3NZ7R4KMKRWYQKCF7HP75L4HX wallet.

both wallets sent some xem to NBSRKTPBGOA25DSWC6LLU5AVDRHP22Z7JPQ3G4AD 11.15.2018 with a gap in ~ 32 blocks.

Both wallets got Xem from Kryptono exchange - NCIRUR3DIM2AH2KQASIEVZIDUP3II4ZI44STJUYA 04.11.2018 with a gap in ~ 61 blocks.



Hi Manfred.

Have you done Apostille yourself?
Can you operate?

1 Like

Hi GodTanu,
Yes. I did it myself. Easy straightforward process until I got stuck making the XEM transfer from my Nano Wallet.While I eventually learned how to resolve this issue — in order to make the deadline payment at the time I had to resort to an alternative option. Yes–after this initial experience, I know now how to operate.

Hi GetCoin,

I own no XPX ,have no XPX account and therefore have conducted no XPX transactions…Your reference to XPX transactions pertains exclusively to Otto, my son , who does have an XPX account

Hi, it seems to be you don’t understand what is going on.

You said

Yes. I did it myself ©

NEM blockchain tells

Apostilled by NBTOLRAMDKBZZPEUEQA25Q3VRUVAEPDUX43CMGRS , Otto wallet (according to your words above). Check you certificate data

What does it mean? - Your PDF document was apostilled not by you OR it was apostilled by you using Otto private key, which means you are owner of XPX tokens(as you have access to private key).


Hi Manfred.

A small lie leads to a big lie.
I can not trust your words.

I am disappointed.

1 Like

As you will have seen from my reply to GodTanu I had a glitch with the node in my wallet and thus used Otto’s wallet on a one time basis only to make the deadline payment. I don’t have his private key and have nothing to do with his XPX account. So I still don’t own any XPX.

If you knew a bit NEM tech side, you would come up with better excuse.

I had a glitch with the node in my wallet ©

  1. It takes 5-7 sec to change a node. There is no reason to apostille PDF from another wallet.

  2. You had enough time for deadline (check deadline according to rules and apostilles timestamp - please find it below), so you could download NEM blockchain to your local laptop.

This Apostille is there to verify that this step was done before 11:59 PM (UTC) on November 16th, 2018.

My conclusion about all this story - you dont know how to use Apostille OR NBTOLRAMDKBZZPEUEQA25Q3VRUVAEPDUX43CMGRS is your wallet.

I dont care about which of the statements above are true, because you lied about both of them.

Yes. I did it myself ©
Your reference to XPX transactions pertains exclusively to Otto ©

I did not have the knowledge at that time to figure out I had a node problem.I do now. I have been learning. So your criticism of my lack of technological expertise having gone through this process the first time is fair enough ----- but I take umbrage at your totally unwarranted allegation that I was lying!!.

@GodTanu, I appreciate your support of NEM, but I don’t see any evidence of subterfuge here. Nano wallet is not the easiest piece of software to use, and we should use this knowledge to improve it and/or make friendlier wallets (like RaccoonWallet). Additionally, I don’t see any requirement that candidates must apostille from their own accounts.

This is a difficult time for the NEM community, but we should strive to be welcoming to new people.

I might be mistaken, but I don’t see any requirement that candidates must apostille their own documents. Owning XPX (or any other token for that matter) is certainly not grounds for disqualification.