Bitcointalk Charity and its funds

[Timelord2067]

Whats up crwth?

Fall guy?

How long we will need to wait for a public documentation, a kind of spreadsheet would be nice. There are a lot of conversations already but I think most importantly we need a proper documentation. cabalism13 please update.

The block-chain entries of what *should* be there is a good starting reference.  With the price of Bitcoin having apparently sunk over the last few weeks/months, it should be easy enough to revert the funds (in any currency) back into Bitcoin at a "new" wallet address (made public before the purchase occurs) where we can see what new transactions transpire.

I thought this is already settled by it seems they choose to keep silent.

Good - where's the money?

[1714063731]

1714063731

[1714063731]

1714063731

[1714063731]

1714063731

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Can you clarify what exactly you mean by "more layers of this stinky onion that have yet to be peeled away"? Do you think there is anyone other than the three members of the forum who participated in this and got some financial benefit?

No, I'm not saying there are more members involved.  But just based on all the BS I've seen on this forum over the years with situations like this, I'm kind of expecting evidence of more misappropriation of funds to be forthcoming.  So far crwth and bL4nkcode have yet to chime in, and I see that as an ominous sign.

Cabalism13 never said anything about needing funds from the charity due to the typhoon, just the story about his father--and frankly I wouldn't take that on face value when we're talking about embezzlement, so I'm not sure why you or anyone else would want to support his excuses (and that's exactly what they are).  How do any of us know that he was faced with a life-or-death situation with his father, where the only option was to take money out of the charity funds?  We've only got the word of someone who went silent after spending money that wasn't his and then after he was caught, stormed off and blamed the community for not trusting him enough (or whatever).

Frankly, if you're going to be holding funds for a charity or anything else that requires you not to dip your hand into the cookie jar, you really should be financially well off enough such that you wouldn't need to.  So the bottom line is that Cabalism shouldn't have had access to an entire pool of charity funds (or even 1/3 of it) if a $500 expense was enough to provoke him to steal.

If I were him I would've gotten a separate loan from DS for the $500 with a shorter due date... or used one of these lending platforms assuming that the crypto cannot be directly liquidated: https://spendmenot.com/best/bitcoin-lending-sites/

Again, that's assuming the story about his father is true.  I don't suspect we'll ever know for sure.

[sheenshane]

I thought this is already settled by it seems they choose to keep silent.

Good - where's the money?

Good question, but only them who know everything.  
Or it could be a good question, where are the documents of the money spent?

All people asked here is the liquidation of the money spent during those activities they held and which is I assumed the paper documents have been lost and now they're facing this into trouble.

[yahoo62278]

I have had many chats with 2/3 of these members and this whole situation kinda deflated my opinion of them. As far as cabalism using 500$ idk if i'd tag him for that being as that's kinda what he did with the charity. All their events were helping communities/families in need. So in his mind he probably felt like he wasn't doing anything wrong. I messaged him over this whole situation and was telling him about my open heart surgery at the end of October this year, and his first response was he thought that I was messaging about maybe the charity helping me out with some funds. That was not the case, but I think that's how his mind works since he has been running the charity. Someone needs help, we as a community should help them. Obviously not everyone who cries "help me please" should be helped, but I think we could all agree that if a well known member needed a boost, we would all probably break our backs and do what we could. You guys can do as you wish, but I will only be tagging if funds were stolen/missing aside from funds used to help someone. I don't agree with his actions, but I can see what/how he was thinking.

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

What I really feel we should do is get with all 3 of these guys and do some kind of audit. We need to know what the balance was at the time of the split( need to verify this via blockchain), addresses involved so it can be checked, expenses for these "activities" they did(receipts apparently are not available, but couldn't we figure out the money spent on these activities by figuring out what was given and the price of each thing?), and finally the balance left. They need to combine what's left, convert to crypto, and send back to the escrow address.

Now let's assume we get this whole mess figured out. Should the charity remain open? Will these guys ever have the full trust of the community again so they could operate the charity if they ran it correctly?

These are my thoughts on this situation. I'm not trying to be soft and not tag anyone, i'm trying to be a little understanding since these guys are not just newbie douchebags. Obviously everyone is free to do as they feel is correct, but i'd like some opinions on my thought process here.

[LoyceV]

Now let's assume we get this whole mess figured out. Should the charity remain open? Will these guys ever have the full trust of the community again so they could operate the charity if they ran it correctly?

I think you're too optimistic, but I'd love to see you're right. Considering you didn't get a complete answer for several weeks now, I'm not really expecting much anymore.
But if they somehow manage to come up with convincing numbers that show all the money was used properly, I'm not going to tell them to stop their charity work.

[dkbit98]

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

I am not going to tag any of them yet and I will give them more time to show more transaction proofs, not only images for their donation work.
It needs time to reproduce everything, especially if they had sloppy or no records keeping, but it can be done in few weeks top.

What I really feel we should do is get with all 3 of these guys and do some kind of audit.

Good luck in getting any real audit for this charity  
I am not sure how Bitcoin is exactly regulated in their country and how they converted BTC to fiat money, they later used for purchasing donation stuff.
In the end we still need to trust their word, because it's not easy to track any coins once they get in exchange wallets.

Now let's assume we get this whole mess figured out. Should the charity remain open? Will these guys ever have the full trust of the community again so they could operate the charity if they ran it correctly?

They are obviously keeping things open and still working, according to latest post in their topic made by crwth.
I would keep this charity running only if the come clean with previous work, and if in future they show exact amount of money/btc spent for something, along with images and short explanation.

[examplens]

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

I am not going to tag any of them yet and I will give them more time to show more transaction proofs, not only images for their donation work.
It needs time to reproduce everything, especially if they had sloppy or no records keeping, but it can be done in few weeks top.

I guess many do not want prematurely to tag anywhere of them.
however, I am very surprised that we don't have a single promise on whether they plan to present the proofs asked at all. Except for some short update from crwth and nothing more.

[NotATether]

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

You can tag them right now with a neutral rating with a reference to this topic, but without any incriminating evidence about the charity, painting red feels a bit overboard to me.

What I really feel we should do is get with all 3 of these guys and do some kind of audit. We need to know what the balance was at the time of the split( need to verify this via blockchain), addresses involved so it can be checked, expenses for these "activities" they did(receipts apparently are not available, but couldn't we figure out the money spent on these activities by figuring out what was given and the price of each thing?), and finally the balance left. They need to combine what's left, convert to crypto, and send back to the escrow address.

The problem with doing audits like this is that often there is no way to get a trace of what was spent on what, or even what money was sent for. The forum isn't the SEC, after all.

[RapTarX]

I just had a try to find all the tx links, relevant discussion & possible expenses. All this information was available on the internet. I just had a try to put them into one place since no one was giving a shit. You can find the sheet here- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Z3nZePiflhAuPh6y_f9LxmL1997vdfeYsQo_hUyspT8/edit?usp=sharing

Relevant addresses:

33tZjC2ZdVib9JLdWZH4rg7HzhuuTG5WZd - crwth
32RYTtV6xGTX55i5QdfA7T8iWgAd2QK7yo - legendster
33c9Df6J6vkGU1cuX84AePoeH2qzuzbcF1 - cabalism13
3LjVmpw2wDWawaPGa8Lj5JYjYciXDAePbW - cabalism13
3LvwmWgo6kS64Rtz5JVwpq3v1R8NXckX2W - crwth
351ZYYihVwJnKKv9iAdGeFxhaJ3t7zzrcA - bl4nkcode
bc1qlk9s9tmsv79hk345s98atht534fac3qu0nrayu - probably cabalism13
1a3eegDyFQAotunG5CknN4JntFzfZC3Mo - not sure who own
bc1qxu65xsfjecr8cxc3ywsp2pjzqp35dvs69tulem - not sure who own
3KwDEEzZycWYC73juBsrbjJjB1zumrx37v - marlboroza
bc1q20yenlspxprxk9dqttc6gue8yz02auth89jdvq - not sure who own (0.56622723 BTC received worth of $18789^#1)

Though cabalism13 said, 0.55 BTC is questionable, from what I can see, a total of 0.56622723 BTC worth $18789 is questionable without any doubt. This is the sum of the amount sent for converting into USDT (supposed to be).
But if I sum the amounts which have no proof, the total is 0.84272723 BTC worth $23,875.96 which in my investigation may not have any proof.

Since bl4nkcode was the escrow, I would like him to answer the following questions if he/they want to assist the issue solved.

1. Is my spreadsheet correct? The receiver of the amount, proof link? If yes, okay; if not, which one & please with a spreadsheet.
2. On row 19 & 20- total of 0.1445 BTC worth $2531 sent to cabalism13 & crwth. Where's the money spent? No discussion here at all?
3. On row 21 & 22- total of 0.112 BTC worth $2006 sent to 2 addresses which was not previously used by any of you. Who received the fund & same question as of #2, where's the money spent?
4. A total of 0.56622723 BTC worth $18789 was transferred to bc1q20yenlspxprxk9dqttc6gue8yz02auth89jdvq, who owns this address? What was the total value after conversion? Who had access to the fund? You, crwth or cabalism13? Where's the money spent?
5. Lastly, there was some altcoin address. Cabalism13 asked to PM people to donate altcoin. Where are the addresses? Who owns these addresses? How much you received on that addresses?

A summary:
Total Received - 2.12264434 BTC
Total Sent - 2.11662723 BTC Rest are tx fees
Total sent USD - $40943 ($23875 is questionable)

#1- Please add $25 USDT more, it was donated by tranthidung.
#2- I didn't add the expense of the website as website expenses was supposed to be donated by someone else.
#3- USD rate is from blockchair (at the time of transfer.)

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

You're probably right on that, but I'm awaiting the final tally from the other two members.  And I don't think I was being too hard on cabalism13 at all, since he clearly was mismanaging funds.  Even if he thought he wasn't, his response to the community speaks volumes.  This is not a person I'd entrust with my money, hence the negative trust.

Also, this isn't my fight since I wasn't a donator and had nothing to do with the workings of the charity, so I'm going to remain silent henceforth in this thread until or unless crwth and bl4nkcode explain themselves.  However, as a DT member (and for my own trust list) I felt a negative was well-justified in this case.

<snip>

I don't know how long it took you to do that analysis, but I've no doubt an even more complete one could have been done by the three members in question if they had the inclination to do so, and it could probably have been finished on the 3rd day of this thread at the latest.

[RapTarX]

Also, this isn't my fight since I wasn't a donator

You didn't donate doesn't necessarily mean it's not your fight. I don't want to mention whether I have donated or not but this charity is named bitcointalk charity & the fund was raised from bitcointalk members. They owe an explanation to the bitcointalk community. You, me & anyone else in this forum deserve an explanation obviously.

I don't know how long it took you to do that analysis, but I've no doubt an even more complete one could have been done by the three members in question if they had the inclination to do so, and it could probably have been finished on the 3rd day of this thread at the latest.

It took ~5 hours. I have read the Charity thread from the first to the last page. Looked for tx relevant discussion, proof. But it's true that if they three were to present everything in one spreadsheet, it would take no more than a few hours as they are the one who knows how the money was spent. As I said-

I just had a try to put them into one place since no one was giving a shit.

[yahoo62278]

Now on to the others, If 1 person is tagged then all 3 should be tagged. Cabalism13 for running the charity incorrectly and making bad decisions, bl4nkcode for showing a poor example of how an escrow should operate, and crwth for agreeing to go along with it.

You're probably right on that, but I'm awaiting the final tally from the other two members.  And I don't think I was being too hard on cabalism13 at all, since he clearly was mismanaging funds.  Even if he thought he wasn't, his response to the community speaks volumes.  This is not a person I'd entrust with my money, hence the negative trust.

Also, this isn't my fight since I wasn't a donator and had nothing to do with the workings of the charity, so I'm going to remain silent henceforth in this thread until or unless crwth and bl4nkcode explain themselves.  However, as a DT member (and for my own trust list) I felt a negative was well-justified in this case.

<snip>

I don't know how long it took you to do that analysis, but I've no doubt an even more complete one could have been done by the three members in question if they had the inclination to do so, and it could probably have been finished on the 3rd day of this thread at the latest.

As I said, everyone is free to do as they feel is correct. Tag or don't tag, Noone would be wrong  here.

I just had a try to find all the tx links, relevant discussion & possible expenses. All this information was available on the internet. I just had a try to put them into one place since no one was giving a shit. You can find the sheet here- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Z3nZePiflhAuPh6y_f9LxmL1997vdfeYsQo_hUyspT8/edit?usp=sharing

Relevant addresses:

33tZjC2ZdVib9JLdWZH4rg7HzhuuTG5WZd - crwth
32RYTtV6xGTX55i5QdfA7T8iWgAd2QK7yo - legendster
33c9Df6J6vkGU1cuX84AePoeH2qzuzbcF1 - cabalism13
3LjVmpw2wDWawaPGa8Lj5JYjYciXDAePbW - cabalism13
3LvwmWgo6kS64Rtz5JVwpq3v1R8NXckX2W - crwth
351ZYYihVwJnKKv9iAdGeFxhaJ3t7zzrcA - bl4nkcode
bc1qlk9s9tmsv79hk345s98atht534fac3qu0nrayu - probably cabalism13
1a3eegDyFQAotunG5CknN4JntFzfZC3Mo - not sure who own
bc1qxu65xsfjecr8cxc3ywsp2pjzqp35dvs69tulem - not sure who own
3KwDEEzZycWYC73juBsrbjJjB1zumrx37v - marlboroza
bc1q20yenlspxprxk9dqttc6gue8yz02auth89jdvq - not sure who own (0.56622723 BTC received worth of $18789^#1)

Though cabalism13 said, 0.55 BTC is questionable, from what I can see, a total of 0.56622723 BTC worth $18789 is questionable without any doubt. This is the sum of the amount sent for converting into USDT (supposed to be).
But if I sum the amounts which have no proof, the total is 0.84272723 BTC worth $23,875.96 which in my investigation may not have any proof.

Since bl4nkcode was the escrow, I would like him to answer the following questions if he/they want to assist the issue solved.

1. Is my spreadsheet correct? The receiver of the amount, proof link? If yes, okay; if not, which one & please with a spreadsheet.
2. On row 19 & 20- total of 0.1445 BTC worth $2531 sent to cabalism13 & crwth. Where's the money spent? No discussion here at all?
3. On row 21 & 22- total of 0.112 BTC worth $2006 sent to 2 addresses which was not previously used by any of you. Who received the fund & same question as of #2, where's the money spent?
4. A total of 0.56622723 BTC worth $18789 was transferred to bc1q20yenlspxprxk9dqttc6gue8yz02auth89jdvq, who owns this address? What was the total value after conversion? Who had access to the fund? You, crwth or cabalism13? Where's the money spent?
5. Lastly, there was some altcoin address. Cabalism13 asked to PM people to donate altcoin. Where are the addresses? Who owns these addresses? How much you received on that addresses?

A summary:
Total Received - 2.12264434 BTC
Total Sent - 2.11662723 BTC Rest are tx fees
Total sent USD - $40943 ($23875 is questionable)

#1- Please add $25 USDT more, it was donated by tranthidung.
#2- I didn't add the expense of the website as website expenses was supposed to be donated by someone else.
#3- USD rate is from blockchair (at the time of transfer.)

I was sent this spreadsheet this morning. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/119Y3xOq4FzUhXKyPN11N_Mtwn37VmkqUj2IQiBi08pQ/edit?fbclid=IwAR1BDCGvy_ohYhRq6AMigOoo0gvY15hYS3Oxl4b3xBuJsAyBgXYjAg1ZwxU#gid=1160771654

I cannot verify the amounts spent are correct. This is from cabalism13

[LoyceV]

I was sent this spreadsheet this morning. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/119Y3xOq4FzUhXKyPN11N_Mtwn37VmkqUj2IQiBi08pQ/edit?fbclid=IwAR1BDCGvy_ohYhRq6AMigOoo0gvY15hYS3Oxl4b3xBuJsAyBgXYjAg1ZwxU#gid=1160771654

I cannot verify the amounts spent are correct. This is from cabalism13

Round numbers indicate inaccurate accounting: Snack and meals: 800, 1200, 1600, 1800, 650, 1400 and 8500. GASOLINE: 1500, 1000 and 500. Even I keep receipts of my gasoline expenses, it doesn't make sense to spend 2+ Bitcoin of donated funds without keeping a single receipt.

[yahoo62278]

I was sent this spreadsheet this morning. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/119Y3xOq4FzUhXKyPN11N_Mtwn37VmkqUj2IQiBi08pQ/edit?fbclid=IwAR1BDCGvy_ohYhRq6AMigOoo0gvY15hYS3Oxl4b3xBuJsAyBgXYjAg1ZwxU#gid=1160771654

I cannot verify the amounts spent are correct. This is from cabalism13

Round numbers indicate inaccurate accounting: Snack and meals: 800, 1200, 1600, 1800, 650, 1400 and 8500. GASOLINE: 1500, 1000 and 500. Even I keep receipts of my gasoline expenses, it doesn't make sense to spend 2+ Bitcoin of donated funds without keeping a single receipt.

This is why I mentioned they need to break down the exact cost of every item they bought for audit purposes. We will never get anything down to the penny regardless, but I do not think it's too much to ask that some effort be put into accounting by these guys.

[RapTarX]

I just had a quick look on the spreadsheet. It was not satisfiable. Though bl4nkcode & crwth expenses have some in depth, cabalism13 didn’t put any.
Either way, I'm confused on the following-

1. Cabalism13 said he spent 0.1225 BTC on this event- https://www.facebook.com/cgslagunadebay/posts/1295536597476624
This 0.1225 BTC is the amount from 0.55+ BTC from the leftover fund sent to Binance on 4th January 2021 but the event Cabalisn13 linked is from 23rd November 2020. Time travel? JK. Can cabalism13 please explain whether it's a wrong one or not?

2. In the details of bl4nkcode spent, you have shown bl4nkcode received 0.25 BTC and spent them. Okay. He received the fund in June 01, 2020; while in the screenshot, there's some USDT sell proofs which is from February 2021. He was supposed to sell the 0.25 BTC before June 11, 2020. Well, he did too. But what about the usdt tx in February 2021? bl4nkcode have received fund in January 2021. Run activities in December 2021 but why the USDT tx from February 2021?

3. bL4nkcode run 2 activities after this thread created? While he received the fund more than 11 months ago on his Binance. When did he sell? How much worth of USD?

I need to check out more. I don’t have time now; it's morning here. I will be checking out more on evening.

[DireWolfM14]

I'm not buying it.  The information provided is way too vague and without receipts there's no way to validate it.  Only one of the individuals even offered any information, and a generous amount time has passed since the data was requested.

And what's with the lack of receipts?  I can only think of two reasons why someone handling other peoples money wouldn't ensure he has all receipts to verify his transactions; malice or ineptitude.  Neither inspire much confidence.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2895
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2894
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2893

[Poker Player]

I'm not buying it.  The information provided is way too vague and without receipts there's no way to validate it.  Only one of the individuals even offered any information, and a generous amount time has passed since the data was requested.

And what's with the lack of receipts?  I can only think of two reasons why someone handling other peoples money wouldn't ensure he has all receipts to verify his transactions; malice or ineptitude.  Neither inspire much confidence.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2895
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2894
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2893

Ok, so I'm going to explain why I am going to support the flags against Cabalism13 and bl4nkcode but not against crwth.

As for cabalism13 it is clear. He was in charge of the operation, admitted to taking $500 for personal use, posted that donations were accepted at non-escrow addresses via PM and admitted to yahoo62278 wrongdoing.

As for bl4nkcode, he is the escrow and had responsibility for the money. Just yesterday I created a neutral tag with this thread as a reference because between people asking for more time and yahoo62278 talking about an audit again, plus the recent hurricane, I could see a couple of months without even getting a neutral tag. I'm going to support the flag and delete the feedback.

As for crwth I think he is clearly less at fault than the other two. If this were a trial for misappropriation of funds in a company, the most serious penalties would go to the boss (cabalism13) and the treasurer (bl4nkcode,) the employee would surely receive lesser penalty if he received any. Also I don't think we have strong evidence against him unlike the other two. In this case I will neither support nor oppose the flag and will stand by my neutral tag.

[yahoo62278]

Ok, so I'm going to explain why I am going to support the flags against Cabalism13 and bl4nkcode but not against crwth.

As for cabalism13 it is clear. He was in charge of the operation, admitted to taking $500 for personal use, posted that donations were accepted at non-escrow addresses via PM and admitted to yahoo62278 wrongdoing.

As for bl4nkcode, he is the escrow and had responsibility for the money. Just yesterday I created a neutral tag with this thread as a reference because between people asking for more time and yahoo62278 talking about an audit again, plus the recent hurricane, I could see a couple of months without even getting a neutral tag. I'm going to support the flag and delete the feedback.

As for crwth I think he is clearly less at fault than the other two. If this were a trial for misappropriation of funds in a company, the most serious penalties would go to the boss (cabalism13) and the treasurer (bl4nkcode,) the employee would surely receive lesser penalty if he received any. Also I don't think we have strong evidence against him unlike the other two. In this case I will neither support nor oppose the flag and will stand by my neutral tag.

I mostly agree with your words here, but I kinda feel like crwth is not an employee but a co treasurer when he accepted funds on the 3 way split. Like I said in my post, if someone is going to tag 1 I personally feel all 3 should be tagged. All of them were wrong and mishandled the funds by not keeping receipts alone. 1 could make a case for all 3 both ways, to tag or not to tag. I'm ok with either way personally.

I'd rather noone got tagged, but that's not likely to happen. I hope anyone else who reads this thread learns from it if they plan on having any part of a charity. Bookkeeping is huge especially when we the community donated the funds. Sticking to an agreement is huge as well.

[AB de Royse777]

I was sent this spreadsheet this morning. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/119Y3xOq4FzUhXKyPN11N_Mtwn37VmkqUj2IQiBi08pQ/edit?fbclid=IwAR1BDCGvy_ohYhRq6AMigOoo0gvY15hYS3Oxl4b3xBuJsAyBgXYjAg1ZwxU#gid=1160771654

I cannot verify the amounts spent are correct. This is from cabalism13

The spreadsheet is asking for access. Why can't we make is public?

Round numbers indicate inaccurate accounting: Snack and meals: 800, 1200, 1600, 1800, 650, 1400 and 8500. GASOLINE: 1500, 1000 and 500. Even I keep receipts of my gasoline expenses, it doesn't make sense to spend 2+ Bitcoin of donated funds without keeping a single receipt.

These numbers are in USD or in their local currency?

I'm not buying it.  The information provided is way too vague and without receipts there's no way to validate it.  Only one of the individuals even offered any information, and a generous amount time has passed since the data was requested.

And what's with the lack of receipts?  I can only think of two reasons why someone handling other peoples money wouldn't ensure he has all receipts to verify his transactions; malice or ineptitude.  Neither inspire much confidence. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2895
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2894
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2893

I have waited enough to be honest. I gave them my benefit of doubt since they were some long term members and contributed in the forum a lot.

I'd rather noone got tagged, but that's not likely to happen.

I don't go and tag people. That's not me but since this is public now - I have responsibility to act hard. After all it's the money in question which was asked for people in need.

Why would a clear transaction reference from them is taking too long? If I am honest I will act fast, very fast because I do not have to think a back up plan to protect me from the words I will speak.

[DireWolfM14]

As for crwth I think he is clearly less at fault than the other two. If this were a trial for misappropriation of funds in a company, the most serious penalties would go to the boss (cabalism13) and the treasurer (bl4nkcode,) the employee would surely receive lesser penalty if he received any. Also I don't think we have strong evidence against him unlike the other two. In this case I will neither support nor oppose the flag and will stand by my neutral tag.

If this were a criminal trial (which obviously it's not,) then yes, I would be in agreement.  But this is more like a civil suit where the proving liability, not guilt is the criteria.  Which brings me to the part of your quote that I bolded:  When someone is charged with handling other people's money (such as charitable contributions,) it's that person's responsibility to provide the evidence of where the money is going.  Since crwth is guilty of not honoring that obligation, in my opinion that's enough for a tag and flag.

The other issue that's worth addressing; all three of these members are still on DT1.

cabalism13's judgement is Trusted by:
1. SiNeReiNZzz (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (787 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. Betwrong (Trust: neutral) (312 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. ralle14 (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (589 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. bL4nkcode (Trust: +15 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (8) 792 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. Yamifoud (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (147 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. Coin_trader (Trust: +8 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (3) 255 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. panganib999 (Trust: neutral) (43 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. Yatsan (Trust: +4 / =2 / -0) (687 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. Rodeo02 (Trust: +1 / =1 / -2) (69 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. Hhampuz (Trust: +113 / =3 / -0) (3270 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Theb (Trust: +5 / =1 / -0) (397 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. crwth (Trust: +5 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 834 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. Ryker1 (Trust: neutral) (150 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. igehhh (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (640 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. roycilik (Trust: +11 / =1 / -0) (1656 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. Best_Change (Trust: +21 / =6 / -1) (828 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. Asuspawer09 (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (238 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. GreatArkansas (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 1085 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. sheenshane (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (948 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. cryptoaddictchie (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (1165 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. Maus0728 (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (1055 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. tranthidung (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (2660 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. jademaxsuy (Trust: +0 / =4 / -1) (219 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. itoybtc (Trust: neutral) (10 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. 1miau (Trust: +9 / =1 / -0) (3360 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. YOSHIE (Trust: +10 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (10) 1301 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27. Debonaire217 (Trust: +0 / =1 / -1) (364 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. TheBitcoinExplorer (Trust: +0 / =1 / -3) (2 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. plvbob0070 (Trust: +1 / =1 / -1) (401 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. protrader786 (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (61 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. Peanutswar (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (516 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.

crwth's judgement is Trusted by:
1. TECSHARE (Trust: +40 / =9 / -2) (954 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. peloso (Trust: +2 / =3 / -6) (186 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. Lauda (Trust: +34 / =17 / -6) (1903 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. robelneo (Trust: +5 / =1 / -0) (57 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. PremiumCodeX (Trust: +3 / =0 / -1) (28 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. asu (Trust: !!!:  +1 / =1 / -24) (634 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. Kelvinid (Trust: neutral) (59 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. bL4nkcode (Trust: +15 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (8) 792 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. Gunthar (Trust: +12 / =0 / -0) (113 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. panganib999 (Trust: neutral) (43 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Yatsan (Trust: +4 / =2 / -0) (687 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. finaleshot2016 (Trust: +3 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (1) 902 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. Squishy01 (Trust: neutral) (16 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. GDragon (Trust: neutral) (125 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. yazher (Trust: neutral) (541 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. Silent26 (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (224 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. creeps (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (44 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. LogitechMouse (Trust: +1 / =2 / -0) (291 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. GreatArkansas (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 1085 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. sheenshane (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (948 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. theyoungmillionaire (Trust: !!!:  +5 / =0 / -21) (1013 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. Maus0728 (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (1055 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. Uao (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (48 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. cabalism13 (Trust: +12 / =1 / -2) (DT1! (5) 1160 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. nakamura12 (Trust: neutral) (527 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. jademaxsuy (Trust: +0 / =4 / -1) (219 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. itoybtc (Trust: neutral) (10 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. Strufmbae (Trust: neutral) (26 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. Debonaire217 (Trust: +0 / =1 / -1) (364 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. plvbob0070 (Trust: +1 / =1 / -1) (401 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
32. _BlackStar (Trust: neutral) (152 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.

bL4nkcode's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Stephen Gornick (Trust: +1 / =1 / -1) (3 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. str4wm4n (Trust: +5 / =6 / -0) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (850 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. subSTRATA (Trust: +2 / =1 / -0) (43 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. Rub3n (Trust: +5 / =0 / -2) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. TMAN (Trust: +27 / =0 / -1) (1306 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. jeremypwr (Trust: +21 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (11) 1350 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. mortare (Trust: +12 / =1 / -0) (25 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. SiNeReiNZzz (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (787 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. examplens (Trust: +4 / =4 / -0) (DT1! (14) 607 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. tmfp (Trust: +8 / =0 / -0) (735 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. Removed yahoo62278 (Trust: +23 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (27) 1763 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. Royse777 (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (10) 1553 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. ralle14 (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (589 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Woultries (Trust: +1 / =0 / -2) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. DoublerHunter (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (113 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. Yamifoud (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (147 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. FlightyPouch (Trust: neutral) (50 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. crwth (Trust: +5 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 834 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. webtricks (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (5) 1371 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. julerz12 (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (343 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. -doubleU- (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (850 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. hugeblack (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (1869 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. eldrin (Trust: +2 / =0 / -1) (38 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. tweetbit (Trust: neutral) (12 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. Untold (Trust: +6 / =2 / -0) (81 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. GreatArkansas (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 1085 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27. sheenshane (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (948 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. cabalism13 (Trust: +12 / =1 / -2) (DT1! (5) 1160 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. Bthd (Trust: +2 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1634 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. 1miau (Trust: +9 / =1 / -0) (3360 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
32. Debonaire217 (Trust: +0 / =1 / -1) (364 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
33. twiki (Trust: neutral) (24 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
34. protrader786 (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (61 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
35. Peanutswar (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (516 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
36. _BlackStar (Trust: neutral) (152 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
37. MrCryptHodl (Trust: +25 / =0 / -0) (340 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.