Dear David Sønstebø,
You have been fired from the IOTA Foundation for "misactions". Dominik Schiener, leader of the Foundation, has decided to confiscate 63 Tera Iotas (Ti) of unclaimed tokens he previously sent to you.
After losing the initiative, you are also losing your grip on reality and the IOTA Community.
Your rushed post about IOTA AS is full of lies and nonsensical statements that can be easily debunked.
Let's do it.
The central tenet of your post is that this is not about the money. You don't consider the IOTA unclaimed tokens pool as yours. You are nothing but a custodian of the funds, with a (presumed) legal responsibility and the best of intentions at heart. You are concerned only with assisting future potential claimers.
Common sense and the information available about your companies, IOTA AS and Ternary GmbH (IoTIFY), prove you are lying.
Ownership vs. Custodianship
Use for personal profit
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you say in the leaked chats that you planned to use the 65 Ti of unclaimed tokens to fund Jinn, your own for-profit startup?
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you say in the leaked chats "first order of business: the remainder of the “left over” funds that would go to us"?
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did IOTA AS use 2.44 Ti of the unclaimed tokens to buy Ternary GmbH (also known as IoTIFY), your own for-profit company?
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you say "my iotas" when you were explaining to the IOTA Community the purchase of IoTIFY with unclaimed tokens?
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you say "you want my tokens" to Sergey Ivancheglo, IOTA Co-Founder, and threaten him with not giving him his share of the unclaimed tokens if he finally forked IOTA? In other words, why did you suggest that if Sergey didn't fork he would receive his 50% of the unclaimed tokens?
Use for other purposes
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you say last year, in the Foundation official Discord, that you planned to use the unclaimed tokens to grow the IOTA ecosystem?
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why do you claim now that the unclaimed tokens should be used to compensate the Trinity Hack victims? Didn't you promise last year to compensate those victims with your own personal funds, rather than the Foundation's? If there is no money, just legal responsibilities, were you planning to compensate the Trinity hack victims with "legal responsibilities"?
Appropriation as a donation
If you consider yourself just a custodian, why did you modify the terms of the 2015 IOTA sale so all unclaimed tokens not claimed by 11th July 2017 should be considered donations to IOTA AS, a company wholly owned by you?
If you consider yourself just a custodian of leftover destined to linger on custody pending legal regulation, why did you establish an "arbitrary" deadline (11th July 2017) for the tokens to become donations to IOTA AS? Shouldn’t you have waited for the regulation?
Refusal to assist claimers
If you consider yourself just a custodian, willing to assist claimers, why there are multiple reports of you refusing to assist claimers? This is one of many examples of a person that you promised to "compensate" and never did.
If you consider yourself just a custodian, willing to assist claimers, why did you respond "Nah, that leads a trace directly back to Jinn/IOTA AS. Right now that account is still “clean” from its past" when Sergey Ivancheglo asked you to use the 65 Ti to pay a claimer?
If you consider yourself just a custodian unable to assist claimers until there is legal regulation, why did you start the IOTA sale in the first place? The "lack of regulation" didn’t stop you from selling the goods then but it stops you from delivering the goods now? How convenient.
Just for fun
If you abhor that Dominik Schiener is diverting funds from the Foundation to his girlfriend's PR Agency, then why did you congratulate Ayelet Noff on SlicedBrand's first anniversary? Were you aware of nepotism in the Foundation only just after you lost your tokens?
If you consider unacceptable that the Board of Directors (ruled by Dominik Schiener) of the Foundation is using "active censorship" in relation to this drama, why did you rely on active censorship throughout the years in relation to IOTA critics which, among other things, were denouncing the misbehaviours of the Foundation?
If you complain that the Foundation is opaque and "does not allow the truth to come out", why did you say last year in the official Discord of the Foundation that those who try to exploit transparency to sow a seed of mistrust are trolls/fudsters? Are you a self-diagnosed troll?
If you claim that the Foundation's runway was again "shrinking by the minute" and that's why you decided to step in with you personal funds, why did you deny multiple times that the Foundation was running out of money while you were in the Board of Directors?
If you despise how Sergey Ivancheglo abandoned you and the Foundation, and depict the event as "the infamous CFB debacle", why are you threatening now to use the same tactics with the Foundation?
Should the shenanigans of the Foundation be exposed only if you lose your tokens?
I could go on and on.
Your post is pure fabulation.
You have realised that ownership is a lost battle, so you have decided to reframe everything as custodianship.
Dominik rewrote the ledger and you rewrote history.
The sheer amount of lies you have been able to pack in a single post should encourage the IOTA Community to re-evaluate each and every one of your past statements.
Looking forward to your next post.
Best,
Hund
