Hello! This is Greg Meredith (full name Lucius = light, Gregory = vigilant, Meredith = watcher of the sea; all of which means Lighthouse).
Greg, I want you to know that we are all here for you and Christian to get help with your drug problem. There is hope. Once you get done with all the litigation filed against you by your investors and the SEC, we can work on getting you the shock therapy that you so desperately need.
i don't frequent this forum, but i know that a lot of misinformation has been spread here. i want to take some time to lay out the case for your involvement, get you informed and show how you can help.
What misinformation? It's a legally provable fact, one that you've admitted on video, that you committed gross malfeasance against AMP holders and Synereo LTD equity investors.
First of all, the Chain architecture that we promoted during the sale was agreed by Dor, Ed Eykholt, myself, and many others of the team. When the first draft of the architecture was produced, Dor insisted that it be renamed the Synereo architecture. This is a matter of record, and Ed Eykholt will testify to this.
Second of all, the architecture was part of an overall organizational plan that always included creating a non-profit company. The point of this company was to protect the commons. The RChain, itself, can be the basis many social applications, from jobs applications to dating applications - not just social network applications.
Listen up nitwit, the reason people gave you money was because they expected a return on their investment. Nobody gives a crap about your stupid, hippie "non-profit company". You want to "protect the commons", but don't give a damn about protecting AMP holder and Synereo LTD equity investor value. You know, those people whose money you want. You were and
still are an employee of Synereo LTD. You do not get to decide "who" owns your work. The company and its shareholders decide what happens to it.
Thus, starting RChain Coop was not Greg splitting off, but Greg following the plan, as even MalthusJohn of the Synereo team, has repeatedly stated in the Synereo slack channel quite recently.
The
ONLY plan you should be following is the one to increase shareholder value. Newsflash, you do not get to take money from people and use it to fund your own personal vision.
The claim that on RChain the AMP is devalued is also inaccurate. The whole idea of the multi-coin approach of RChain where eventually other coins can be exchanged for phlogiston (which plays the same role as gas in the EVM), is that it begins to piggyback on the other coins distribution network, while concentrating social value of the AMP in the attention economy layer. (
See the architecture document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo/edit#heading=h.lr5urui9mldf ). The salient point is that AMPs alone are useful in the attention economy. Thus, if a dapp developer makes a dapp that uses a different coin, to make it social, using the service level contracts of the attention economy, their dapp is also tethered to AMPs, and thus, the other coins their dapp uses becomes entangled with AMPs. This greatly increases the reach and ultimately the value of AMPs.
That's
your opinion. It's my opinion and the opinion of many other investors and AMP holders that
your "multi-coin approach" will debase and devalue our investment. It is also our opinion that your proposal for RChain is unfeasible. Your current code doesn't even work in a truly decentralized manner. Why should we believe that you can deliver on a much more complicated vision? Do you actually think that people believe that you care about their money when you hold them as financial hostages via your actions, because you have a personal disagreement with Dor and the rest of the company?
These are all very positive developments. Regarding the less positive developments, Dor has stated on this forum that our differences prior to the sale were not major. This is false.
The only reason i went along with the sale was that Dor gave me verbal and written assurances that my requirements for governances changes that would prevent the mess we are currently in would be addressed in a timely manner. There are eyewitnesses that have already testified to this on video. He didn't follow through. We went into mediation, and he still didn't follow through. So, i went public.
That's a bunch of bullshit Greg. You went along with the sale with the full intent that if you didn't get
your way, you would make all the investors pay, financially, by destroying the value of their investments, until everyone gave in to your demands for control of
our money and the company. If you had
so many disagreements with Dor and couldn't stand to work with him, you should
NOT have gone through with the sale. Period. Dor, who is the
CEO, has the right and responsibility to change his mind about governance or anything when it comes to protecting shareholder value and guess what?
You have to abide by it or you're fired. You have
NO legal power to unanimously declare that you're going to "follow your plan" which entails leaving, starting up another company, and attempting to force us all to fund you with what is tantamount to financial blackmail. This is called malfeasance, fraud, and malintent. You are solely responsible for it as it was your actions alone which led to this outcome.
Dor, pretending to act on behalf of all of Synereo, has proposed a funding level for RChain that constitutes failure to deliver on its promises to investors. It is not a workable budget as the video'd budget reviews expose. (See the RChain youtube channel.) i made a counter proposal that Dor censored from the announcements channel of the Synereo slack.
Make no mistake. i will work on and deliver RChain and the attention economy to the community, regardless of what happens between Dor and myself. i owe this to investors and to the community. The issue here is that Dor is not deploying the funds in a way that matches the promises made to investors. Dor is lying in public and Dor is censoring the debate. Ask yourself, is this the sort of ethics and culture you want in your decentralized social network? This is what happens right at the very beginning before the existing alpha code becomes beta and you start having sensitive information in the network. How will it be later?
Who do you think you are? When you sold shares,
YOU became an employee for the
SHAREHOLDERS. You do not get to dictate or demand your own funding levels. You work on what you are told to work on and you deliver or you are
FIRED! You do not have the right to go public with internal personal disputes or disagreements with the intention of harming your shareholders just because you do not get the funding you want or "think you need".
You are the one airing your personal grievances in unofficial channels with people who silence and kick/ban others.
This is why i am making all this public. First of all vigorous debate is good! Second of all, scrutiny and diligence on your investment is good! This is why i have made it a point to hold weekly meetings in video show the work we are doing, give team updates and answer questions from investors. Its why the code is open source, and everyone has been encourage to download and try out the alpha. My work has always been very public and scrutinized, and the core algorithms peer reviewed in high profile conferences. So, focusing attention and making people really take a look at their investment is great! But the most important point of all is one of ethics. Is this the social network of making a quick buck, of trading AMPs on inside knowledge of how things are going inside Synereo, or is this the social network that belongs to the people? Because, if this does belong to the people, then censorship and pivots from promises to investors have no place in it.
You made it public in an attempt to force our hand to give you further funds by putting everyone's investments in jeopardy from your actions. You're not fooling anyone.
Moving forward, if Dor does not want to accept the amendment to the counter proposal i submitted, and at least devote half of the funds investors wanted to go to RChain to the effort, then i suggest we split the coin, following Vlad Zamfiri's quite excellent and well thought out proposal.
You're
NOT getting any more of our money.
How can you help? Reach out to others in the community and help them get informed. Reach out to shareholders, andy@synereo, James and Gigi at NFX, Simon Dixon at BttF, and Dor. Let them know your preferences. State in a clear and loud voice what you want for your network.
If you have any questions, i am always available. Don't hesitate to reach out. i'm leithaus on by synereonet.slack.com and rchain.slack.com. i'm here to serve.
Peace,
--greg
It's very telling that you posted this in this old thread and
NOT in the
official, unmoderated Synereo thread. I guess you didn't want to show your face in there, because everyone is screaming for your head, so you come here and try to get some support. You won't even face those who you've caused financial harm. You're a real piece of work.
You've got less than 96 hours to commit more acts of malfeasance against your former supporters and investors until you're gone. Nobody likes you and nobody trusts you. You are solely responsible for the financial damage that has been done to
US, AMP holders and Synereo LTD equity investors, and you have committed these acts against
US when you were a "board member" and "chief officer" responsible for looking out for our best interests. I know and you know that you are
personally liable. I'll state it right here and right now that
I WANT YOU OUT ON YOUR ASS ASAP!
