If you don't have arguments wasserman, than you start to delete postings.
from the moderated thread:
Iudica, do not worry, we do not delete any of your messages but it's a shame that people like you exist in this environment.
It's a shame, that people fake something.
I never said that I had contacted (Winheller Firm). Only I said it would be a valid option when needed it
Me too, you wrote "Even though we have not reached them yet, we plan to do so shortly to discuss our project and as soon as we have some information we will post it. "
There is not written: "A valid option would be, if we have enough money, blablabla..." ok? There is written shortly, to discuss. And since the start of the ICO you even didn't tried.
And more I didn't told. But it is shady enough.
You're drawing conclusions without proof of anything.
My proof is an email and a telephone chat with Mr. Winheller. Both I can't publish here, but in comparison to you, Frank or Hao I am not anoymous. You can sue me easily in each German court and then we can ask Mr. Winheller as a witness.
, but before we need to know how much funds we raise.
Very stupid decision, because now 35%-50% of all collected BTC will be taxed away forever!
If we only get raised 100 bitcoins we can not spend all in legal fees because we can not do anything for development.
Yes, now 50 BTC are in taxes, clever decision: Instead of asking first, how much the legal fees are (minimum ca. 10 BTC) you waste minium 50 BTC.
Perhaps this is because you defend another project and see us as competition?
I have approx. 12 cryptocoin related projects, which I support. With which you think you can conquer?
Or because we denied your legal assistance?
As I already wrote, it is of course suspicious, if someone refuse free legal support. No one need to have me as a legal adviser. And it isn't rare, that I send people to a third person, because their project need another support or even just a cheaper tax consultant would be enough.
But in your position (not knowing how much you raise and no legal orientation) it is really strange that you refuse support in such an early stage of contact.
(We dont answer your mail?
Please read carefully! Frank(!) never replied to me. On
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/opair-statement-frank-h-rettig?trk=prof-post he wrote "Bei weiteren Fragen können Sie mich gerne per E-Mail kontaktieren."
This i did according to this: "Contact me at
frank.h.rettig@gmail.com for more information." And I never got a reply from him(!)
If you want I can copy & paste our mails here)[/b]
Hahaha, what it will proof? That you can use a text editor, that all.
Are you trying to kill, before birth,
No, I was supporting this project from the beginning, with offering support, with doing research, with offering a confidental video chat for free.
But I want to "kill" is the illusion, there is this specific Frank H. Rettig.
a project that has many months of preparation
It is so difficult to fake linkedin profiles? Because I can't see other preparation. Shitty marketing campagne and not a single line of code in github.
and that try to bringing new features (never realized before) to this environment.
Onecoin also had a debit card. Maybe it isn't the only mutual thing between you and Onecoin.
Just because we do not make a video call with you (even you want that we show you ours ID Card?), for the reasons already set up hundreds of times,
Which reason? I mean reason not excuse or pretext. If Frank already posted his real identity on linkedin, he will not harm himself by confirming this identity in a video chat of 10min.
it does not make us better or worse proposal, just different.
From the view of all this people, which money you want, it make it better. Because this video call can destroy the clear hints that there is a lot of fake in this ICO. And where is fake there is very often scam.
Your choice already, your ICO is already near death. Even before my post. I just want to protect some more inexperienced users.
We just want to let us work in peace.
No one stops you working. Go, sit in front of your pc and code. But stop lure money from innocent people with lies.
We are offer a full escrow with SebastianJu and he will release the funds to us by PARTS!!!!!
He is escrower not arbitrator. This different you already didn't understand, when I made escrow for lisk. His duty is not to make quality control. And there is no clear description, no milestones and no rules how much money you will get for which feature. And already now you start by if you will not get enough money, you will skip parts of the project. What is understandable, but absolutly not handable by Sebastian.
you think we are shady?
A bit because...
If we dont deliver or stop develop he will refund to everyone.
...this is not true. Just 5-10 BTC will be refunded, for the rest you don't offer escrow. This is shady for me. If you really want to deliver, you will get the money anyway.
Ah yes, because of "the terms have been set at the beginning". Sorry, but stop thinking you can fool adult people with such pretext. You already plan to change you own set rules by paying BTC for the campagne. So the rules are just holy for you as long it is profitable for you.
And if we didnt reach the goal we have only two options (its the truth), do a new ICO or continue with the develop with less funds.
Aha, why not to refund. I don't see how you want to realise debit cards with so less money, because the external cost of this project will be higher. And even for smart contracts you need legal support. Not forgetting, that because of your clever preparation of this ICO, you will make a direct donation to the tax office about 35% to 50% of the whole BTC.
BTW.,
you and Frank still have the option to solve everything. How? A lot of people showed you already. I will have no porblems to write here, that I made wrong conclusions, if my conclusions are not fitting to the reality.
And I am still offering you legal/tax support boost for free. It will be difficult to solve this 35%-50% tax problem and now I don't recommend you a gGmbh or other charitable organisation, because the money is already taxed, but maybe there is still some hope to minimise the damage or at least.
