Based on the terms that were (irresponsibly) set and dictated by the board of NVO, it seems as if the services of the escrows involved were completed according to the terms that were established by the parties involved. The accusations brought forth in this thread are that the escrows were acting in their best interest to imply theft of a portion of the escrowed funds. However, to me (and I hope that it doesn't appear I'm taking sides), it appears that no terms of the original agreement were broken by the escrow(s).
I think that is a pretty ridiculous assertion.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hello.
I am one of the escrows for the NVO-ICO. The 2-of-3 multi-signature address for this project will be:
3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z
Lauda,
17/05/2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZHJdIAAoJEPTjrTxS+ZrbuQcH/ia4aFdQQe9+p6EnuuYed7gY
eubk16Pkzx21l8JcljJYadIDYW51TI76IukSFwYmoLfG3HoRTexwD02ZYa0bA4oO
cm4kaikbf3U9CU32uJ6jklthpc8HbrLs2H+BJMrcA/1dofQKhXntDHUqPQFuTqlR
JitQ3uzLlJ1OFyiRXOpO5kvSD1lGLUS2rXugULZrXZExT0xcA39j+du9QfdC/26N
lFl9y/HA+XSRgf618dSPmxpv6JtORtERvS4kklZvVFIjIxuNy/+kwE2t1qO1Xz1Q
x2UBkbGATrw3MYPbck5TLdcbLNOdX3321r2K8YY7K2CKNCe4zbP0td+gKTPQLEc=
=n++w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
minerjones may 17 2017 I am escrow for NVO and the following is the multi-sig escrow address 3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
13DXoSQN7UDuxx7kokCPQMyQmvyEyoa3YU
ILQB/aWN9Itv0NkKmIeelGj4fnPYk1QSM8TaHJd/BRURD7mJzMpNwzVe29oDYYDt9Pwja/PsReutyAM1E7tDb0o=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Staked BTC address ->
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg10822025#msg10822025 (1BLazedp2eGDrDM3NMbxkn7n4PCCk6WYVX)
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Blazed 5/17/2017 I am an escrow for NVO and the following is the multi-sig escrow address 3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1BLazedp2eGDrDM3NMbxkn7n4PCCk6WYVX
G2+1a9Uo5GU7Ch3dM/5a3c/b4NHKk2szD8CngvvomARgIVG9d7YtQGwK/ZJUn5QiEEBkK3yfW0RQIpE8g4I0KOY=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The above says two things, 1st it explicitly says that the bitcoin would be held in 3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z, and 2nd, it implied that each of the three above escrows would be the sole custodian of one of the three private keys that can spend funds in the above address, requiring two of those keys.
The bitcoin very much was not held in that address, and there is circumstantial evidence that all of the bitcoin was able to be spent by one person.
The above is a breach of contract.
Further, there is a
minimum of 10
BTC unaccounted for in regards to the BCH coins being exchanged for bitcoin. If you were to describe this in the most generous of terms, you would say this is a "fee" for exchanging the coins, however this was neither disclosed, nor agreed to before the "fee" was charged. Realistically, this money was stolen, and the amount is most likely to be closer to 30
BTC or so, based on trading volumes at the time.
I would make similar statements in regards to the various alts collected, however the amount missing is far greater, in the millions of dollars, and the percentage of money from the sale of the altcoins missing is also far greater.
