Good luck guys. All the best. I shall not say more.
1 Like
Pointing fingers at each other really does nothing at this point.
Good thing is, at least a lot of issues are out in the open, and many candidates are acknowledging them.
Hopefully all this will move in a positive direction for the Foundation & Community & NEM itself…
7 Likes
I’d much rather have a much smaller say in a fair and inclusive vote through PoI than being one of the ~300 voices in the current set up. There’s no way that this is fair and representative election as it stands. It’s sad and frustrating to see this go ahead with large sections of the community raising concerns. I also completely disagree with membership/voting rights being paid for by people with a vested interest in the elections - it’s just not ethical.
3 Likes
Yes especially when you can buy website maintenance for a couple of hundred bucks.
Dan
Approval processes don’t rely on people having to ask for information so that they can approve. It doesn’t work that way. Seeking approval is an active process not a passive one.
Fact is that the list was never shared with the council ( at least I didn’t have access to it ) and as a result these people couldn’t have been approved. Once the list was shared with me it was clear why…
How would we defend a membership base that consists of people from over 20 countries yet has one country that had about 64% share in that population ?
Looking at the diversity of our community it’s not likely to be a coincidence.
What really needs to be questioned here is why obvious attempts to ensure a fair election have been blocked for months and ultimately there were only two people on the council that actively worked on organisation of the election.
Those people were never rejected. The membership status was pending until we finally agreed in the council on how to proceed ( which took way too long ).
What Lon failed to mention is that it was never checked whether these subscriptions actually came from real individuals. For all I know it may have been 500 sockpuppets.
2 Likes
Some of you are aware that I decided to put up a vote to see if council could agree to change the voting to a POI based vote.
A 75% majority was required to amend the by-laws so unfortunately we didn’t make it.
It should be mentioned that although there were some ideas on how to make this legally compliant, a positive vote would not have guaranteed there would have been a POI vote.
Although I know who voted against, it’s not up to me to share that information.
I realise that many community members will be disappointed about the outcome of this vote. However, I would like to ask kindly to not turn this into a which hunt. Although I encourage all council members to be transparent about how they voted and why they chose to do so, ultimately It’s up to each of them to decide whether they actually do so.
10 Likes
really sad to see that they not even tried to change it to PoI 
1 Like
Alternative suggestion is to preserve core developers and fire everyone else, while rehiring 1-2 product mangers top. Collaborating with mathematicians in academy would help. If product is good and needed it will go. Making “congress” out of this is waste of time, by-laws LOL give me a break. Yes it should be that simple
1 Like
Which position has voting rights? 2 advisors and 5 Council Members?
No , advisors don’t have voting rights. It’s seven council members.
I see.Thank you
That is very sad reading. It was bad enough in the first instance but with all the discussion in the forums it is even worse now. An opportunity arose to listen to the community and respond, but instead for whatever reason it has been ignored.
The Foundation needs to understand it was created by the community. If it is not going to listen or benefit the community then it serves no purpose
I’m deeply worried for the future of the foundation after seeing those results.
The two council members who voted no on this should explain themselves publicly.
If those two council members are running in this election and will get elected because of this, I can assure you that they will loose complete community support and will certainly not be accepted.
They now still have the chance to either change their mind about this or withdraw from running again.
2 Likes
Irrespective of the actual outcome of the vote, two procedural questions:
- Why is all voting done in secret? How are council members supposed be evaluated if their voting record is unknown?
- Shouldn’t there be some summary of the arguments for and against a proposal to give some insight into the motivations? Something similar to a majority and dissenting opinion, for example.
17 Likes
I have been part of NEM for a long time. This is an emergency so I am speaking out. Everything here is documented in emails and text logs, which others can leak if they see fit.
Lon Wong was the NEM Foundacion president for 2017-2018. He suddenly “stepped down” in April 2018. In reality Lon was forced out because he was caught putting NEM resources and employees to his own company, ProximaX. In other words, stealing. And abusing the trust placed in him to act in the best interests of NEM. In fact, ProximaX is a fork and can be seen as a competitor to NEM and would likely step in to take NEM’s place if NEM did poorly. This was all covered up.
Kristof Vanderek took over as interim president until the end of 2018, when NEM community planned to elect a new president and council members.
Now the election is happening. This is the first time using this election rules and they were discovered to have major flaws in allowing fake voters. In the middle of 2018 the staff saw that hundreds of people (in one certain country) who were not involved in NEM had been signed up to vote. Kristof needs to release this information. Which country was that?
Lon’s lifetime friend Stephen Chia is the regional head of NEM Southeast Asia. Stephen is on the NEM Foundacion council. Stephen owns a large stake in ProximaX in his public accounts, and may own a lot more privately. Stephen stands to profit if ProximaX over take NEM’s business.
Stephen is now running for president of NEM, and Lon has promoted his campaign.
Kristof asked the council to change the voting rules to a more fair system. Stephen (and Nelson Valero) are thought to have blocked it and will not answer questions if they did. Kristof said the council worked on this since June and have kept hitting road blocks. Time was running out so the council compromised with a system that required a 50 USD fee as a spam prevention to stop people from signing up if they were not willing to put their own money into the success of the election.
Nelson was caught paying his own funds to other peoples voting accounts, against the purpose of the fee. Many other voting accounts were funded from a ProximaX account. It is estimated that there only 300 voting accounts and about 80 of them were paid for by ProximaX and its interests. These are NOT people who were involved in the NEM community, forums, development, or investing. Here is evidence. https://coggle.it/diagram/W-s6LTnK8iR79jfC/t/ndbrufe7r5oanede43vctmuvrhti6xz7tqfvntmu/be8d7b37ddc4e1bb7a8c3a4c9d6549ad1c0a389e9a9c2cdcea240ebb426a1302
Nelson has been asked directly by the community if he is taking money or working for ProximaX and has not yet answered direct questions. Is he acting as their employee? (Almost certainly yes.)
In the last 24 hours the council took a vote to switch the elections to POI voting, which is how all previous voting have been done. All other council voted yes but Stephen and Nelson blocked it.
The council wants to review and possibly remove some election voting accounts which cheated the spam prevention. Stephen and Nelson seem to trying to block this.
The reasonable conclusion is that Stephen and possibly Nelson are profiting from ProximaX, and seeking to cheat the election by blocking POI or other fair voting and paying non-community members to register. With their 80+ accounts they can win president, vice president, and stack the entire council with ProximaX people, against the community and NEM employees. They can massively divert NEM funds into ProximaX, or just crash NEM and ProximaX would rise in importance as NEM falls.
The other council members and the community must stop covering up this.
COUNCIL come in the open about why Lon was forced to step down.
COUNCIL, look at the NEM rules, laws, and constitution for malfeasance or conflict of interest. There are rules about acting against the interest of NEM.
ProximaX has been shown to have improperly taken NEM resources. (Lon was running ProximaX when he stole.) If Nelson and/or Steven was taking money or being an employee from a company that is known to have stolen from NEM, that is council member malfeasance and conflict of interest. Stephen clearly has a conflict of interest as a ProximaX stake holder AND as a candidate. One or both of their conflicted council votes must be removed or recused and a new fair POI council vote should happen.
Community members, if you agree, please let the council members know. Core developers, we need you to contact the council to tell them they are obligated to remove malfeasance.
I invite any one to dispute any thing here and see if the emails and document leaks come out to prove it.
STEPHEN MUST RECUSE FROM COUNCIL VOTE!
13 Likes
Finally someone stepped up and shared the real reson why Lon isn’t a president anymore. And yes, I was aware of all of it since march, that’s why I was so negative towards NEM Foundation during last year.
3 Likes
Both and one of you two are liars to the core. Show me the proof. Don’t just say. Talk is cheap.
I did not step down because I was caught with putting resources NEM resources and employees to my own company,
The flow of your logic is all so wrong to start with to make this so illogically constructed. How could i use NEM resources when Proximax came into being as a project after its ICO and after i stepped down?
Such lies.
I don’t think this is the way to go. Clearly NOT public forum topic. This way
you are going to kill little hope which is left of NEM.
I agree, any & all voting should be public record for an elected office.
Isn’t that standard across the globe?
1 Like
Finally… someone said it.
Lon is using NEM resources form the beginning. They are using even now. Paul Christian and Dona Rinon are helping Proxima X. Read my other thread - Bookkeeping, Budgeting, Cashflow, Financing
How much money did we spend in the Middle Eastern region in 2017?
Why is a single family is managing all the allocated middle east funds?
Who approved this under what circumstances?
Paul and Dona - so-called NEM Middle East are still working for Proxima X and NEM at the same time. I’m sure they are getting a bounty from Proxima X. (@GetCOINtoday You can dig this part) They spend close to $15K to incorporate the Middle East office and issued their own funds so that they can run the business like a family project.
I’m an insider and I think it’s best for NEM if we kick out the existing cheaters from the top position.
4 Likes