Letter from ICF Founder, why No to #839

[Cosmos_Nanny]

I have no personal ambition in ICF, nor any financial interest in its operations as it’s been for many years. However, I feel heavily responsible for how the foundation is legally compliant, using my capital properly, running according to the Notarial Deed I signed off on and making sure there’s no potential criminal activity for my own reputation and my own peace to sleep at night.

How would you feel if it were your name, signature, and reputation attached to an organization that provides very little to no meaningful transparency? If it was your life, and your compliance with your government attached to yet another crypto foundation falling into possible disrepute?

How would you feel if you helped organize a $17m fundraiser for the foundation you created – and this foundation ends up pleading imminent poverty 6.5 years later?
After receiving 5000 BTC and 240,000 ETH in 2016? After receiving 20,000,000 ATOM at Genesis in 2019?

Would you be able to sleep at night? Have some empathy bro.

[Cosmos_Nanny]

@jacobgadikian

Because I think those comments are a bunch of links that are directly related to why we are removing the mempool.

You think or you know? Thank you.

[Ash_Han]

@meandme

I don’t understand what the link is between “ICF not talking to me” and “I’m voting no on prop 839”

Hi meandme,

It’s simple.

It’s natural that I can’t trust ICF’s current financial practice that is unable to provide financial reports even if they have to share and unable to share the statement they promised months ago, so I wouldn’t support another major fund transfer until it’s clear and I can trust again.

[vixcontango]

So you are saying any public company in the US is more transparent than an “open systems” entity like Informal?

Moreover, as far as I understand Informal is a for-profit entity. Other coins have for-profit entity and they tend to find business customers and raise their own money. In this way they find real world usage of the token they support which is part of the reason why they exist. They don’t routinely raid the protocol treasuries.

More importantly, is there an end state for the Cosmos Hub after which there should be no development? Or is the Informal or other teams thinking that the Cosmos Hub will be always in active development?

As a guy who ran IT departments of major banks, you would develop a certain project for a few months to a year and after that the project would go in maintenance mode. In other words, during active development for some division you would hire 10-20 people develop a bunch of apps for 2-3 years but then at then end you fire everybody and 3 people sit and maintain 20 apps.

For how many years and what functionalities do we need Cosmos Hub development? We have Shared Security out. I understand there maybe some maintenance of that to work out bugs and kinks in 2024. But after that what are we developing for the Cosmos Hub?

I think in 2024 the most important objective is to make sure Shared Security gets used in the real world and provides value for the ATOM token - which is the reason why it was developed.

At some point the Cosmos Hub code base needs to be done being developed and needs to ossify.

If these funds will be used to develop Mesh Security, I would be against it because I don’t see how this functionality accrues value to the ATOM token. I am an ATOM token holder not Cosmos ecosystem token holder (there is no such thing). Why is Cosmos Hub development team developing functionality that allows Osmosis and Juno for example to bypass the Cosmos Hub for security? Osmosis and Juno teams should be funding that.

Let me give you a simple principle about how I think about the world: when one doesn’t have money, money is very important because you need money (ie resources) to live and do anything productive. When one has money, then he doesn’t really “need” them because obviously he already has them.

So… I would be more cavalier with Informal development requests if my investment is in the money. But it isn’t - as such how well money/resources are distributed and to what end is kind of important right now.

[Ash_Han]

@meandme

Someone thinks they have a job, doesn’t say or do anything for 6+ years, and then comes and says “yo, wat up”…gtfo

I am asking for financial reports, which is my right upon the establishment agreement.

And Brian is claiming that the right doesn’t exist because they didn’t register, which is also their malpractice.

I need nothing more than that.

@meandme

so should be leading the foundation?

Unfortunately I don’t want to lead or have any ambition here.

[jacobgadikian]

@Cosmos_Nanny

You think or you know? Thank you.

They are. I know.

[Ash_Han]

@crainbf

The ICF is a Swiss foundation and does not have any reporting requirements to some Korean regulator. Nor did we receive any request for information from such an entity directly.

I do and I am the founder. As you well know, governmental duty is your responsibility to comply not government is reminding you every time when there’s set rule. And later penalty or fine would follow.

@crainbf

Ash then repeated his request and said that he was surprised that he was not on the board. This is more than 6 years after the establishment of the foundation during which time AFAIK Ash had no involvement with the foundation.

I was surprised that you told me I had no right to receive the reports and my right has’t been registered with your own ignorance. I didn’t expect it to be the certain board at first since the right could’ve been registered in many forms and names. You guys were really slow back in the days too.

@crainbf

I don’t understand how he was under the impression that he was on the board this entire time, but obviously makes no sense and is easily verifiable in the official company registry

Because you(ICF) never disclosed the official company registry until recently. You never invited or updated on anything at all. That’s why I used that term that ‘I was blinded for years’ in person. You only reached out to me for my signature when opening a bank account.

@crainbf

I find it hard to believe he actually thought he was on the board. Certainly he didn’t attend a single meeting, sent an email or did anything else that a board member usually does.

There are many forms of operations and you explained how FC works only recently.

@crainbf

Ash claims that some promises were made for him to be added to the Foundation Council 6.5 years ago. But no current FC members have any knowledge of this and, again, he was never added.

Would you register if the promise is acknowledged? I already provided the written proofs. It’s your fault to fail to register and your fault to fail to proceed with the administrative work. You can’t put it on me since I provided everything needed.

And you keep on repeating yourself that you don’t know and you don’t acknowledge. I understand the ICF design was led by the original president without discussing with you. However you are president now you can’t play I don’t know card.

Considering it all happened just because of the financial reports, your desperately refusing to provide it makes me feel even more weird. Think about how would you feel seriously.

[jacobgadikian]

Ash, if it helps, I am happy to get on a call with you and Brian.

And I want to say thanks for setting up the foundation.

Additionally, because of the retaliation out of informal, Notional will now change our vote to veto.

I hope that you will consider the same and consider urging others to do the same.

I spoke with @uditvira this morning and I urged him to veto this proposal as well. FYI, @uditvira, @jtremback and I have an excellent working relationship and I want them to run the hub.

So I think that they are going to need to change corporate structure because informal systems is just not a safe organization. When organizations retaliate against security researchers and try to bury information about security, they put the whole ecosystem at risk.

That is the reason for my veto.

I hope you will join me.

[Cosmos_Nanny]

Isn’t @uditvira Hypha?
Why would he veto his own funding request?

[Ash_Han]

“No” to #839

My reason for “NO” is simple and clear:

It’s natural that I can’t trust ICF’s current financial practice that is unable to provide financial reports even if they have to and unable to share the statement they promised months ago, so I wouldn’t support another major fund transfer until it’s clear and I can trust again.

Also I am totally fine even if the proposal is passed because this “NO” is considered my expression of distrust and urge for change in ICF.

I respect if other validators feel they can trust ICF and fine with spending the community pool for the company of another ICF member. Or they feel that even if they don’t trust ICF, still important to get them work for Cosmos anyways.

Still, I believe people might have various reason for “NO”, which I respect:

1. They think that the proposal should be modified and re-applied in a better fit way.
2. They don’t want to have the community pool drained and reserve it for other more casual supports for other teams while ICF’s fund is there to support the core dev work.
3. They want to express the concerns regarding the chronic opacity and nepotism wishing for some change
4. They want to show some negotiation power so they don’t feel threatened and no choice but “yes” all the time whenever fund is requested by the core dev teams

I also believe people might have various reason for “YES”, which I respect:

1. They feel like they need to fund the core dev team from the community pool because they believe it’s the purpose of community pool not ICF.
2. They deeply respect the ICF’s decision to also utilize the community pool capital for the core dev work.
3. They don’t care about ICF in distrust or empty community pool and just want Informal to work on something so Atom price can be improved.

[Cosmos_Nanny]

@crainbf @ebuchman @jaekwon @mpg Can you confirm this is the notarial deed that was registered to create the foundation on 02/08/2017?

Source: https://github.com/gaiaus/ICF/blob/main/people/ash_han/ICF%20Founder%20Ash%20Han.pdf

[Cosmos_Nanny]

Source: https://github.com/gaiaus/ICF/blob/main/stiftung/CHE-199.569.367.pdf

[Cosmos_Nanny]

Thank you for sharing.

[Ash_Han]

true

And it’s little more than ideal. I believe it’s the minimum they are obliged to.

[jacobgadikian]

@Ash_Han

Also I am totally fine even if the proposal is passed because this “NO” is considered my expression of distrust and urge for change in ICF.

The problem is that there’s no difference between the ICF and informal systems. That’s why I’m recommending veto, and that’s actually why the security issue was not addressed much earlier.

[crainbf]

@Ash_Han

I do and I am the founder. As you well know, governmental duty is your responsibility to comply not government is reminding you every time when there’s set rule. And later penalty or fine would follow.

It’s our duty as a Swiss foundation to comply with Swiss law. It’s definitely not our duty to comply with whatever imaginary law applies in whatever country. And, once again, we never received any request for information or otherwise from any Korean regulatory and just from you personally.

@Ash_Han

I was surprised that you told me I had no right to receive the reports and my right has’t been registered with your own ignorance. I didn’t expect it to be the certain board at first since the right could’ve been registered in many forms and names. You guys were really slow back in the days too.

First of all, I was not involved in the ICF setup back then. Second of all, you have absolutely no rights and obligations in the foundation. You didn’t after it was established and you don’t know.

@Ash_Han

Because you(ICF) never disclosed the official company registry until recently. You never invited or updated on anything at all. That’s why I used that term that ‘I was blinded for years’ in person. You only reached out to me for my signature when opening a bank account.

This is absurd. The company registry is public anyone can look at it any time. There is nothing we can “withhold”.

@Ash_Han

There are many forms of operations and you explained how FC works only recently.

Again, if you genuinely believed you were on the board for this entire time while doing absolutely nothing, you were just extremely confused. That is not our responsibility or problem.

@Ash_Han

Would you register if the promise is acknowledged? I already provided the written proofs. It’s your fault to fail to register and your fault to fail to proceed with the administrative work. You can’t put it on me since I provided everything needed.

And you keep on repeating yourself that you don’t know and you don’t acknowledge. I understand the ICF design was led by the original president without discussing with you. However you are president now you can’t play I don’t know card.

Considering it all happened just because of the financial reports, your desperately refusing to provide it makes me feel even more weird. Think about how would you feel seriously.

The Foundation Council is elected by the current FC members. Personally, I would vote against adding you to the board, because I would not want to work with you on the board and my impression from this conversation and our email threads is that it would make our job of creating an efficient and well-run organization harder and not easier.

[Ash_Han]

@crainbf

It’s our duty as a Swiss foundation to comply with Swiss law. It’s definitely not our duty to comply with whatever imaginary law applies in whatever country. And, once again, we never received any request for information or otherwise from any Korean regulatory and just from you personally.

It’s MY duty as a citizen of my country as I repetitively explained. It’s called “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act(FATCA)”. I am the one has the reporting duty. Government doesn’t even know/care that ICF exist.

It’s impossible for someone of your age don’t know this. I am confused if you are just playing ignorance.

Reporting is personal duty to bear and that’s why you need a lawyer or accountant to help. Government do not find and calculate assets or holdings for you, and if ever they do, it means you failed to comply and government will give you a penalty.

@crainbf

Second of all, you have absolutely no rights and obligations in the foundation. You didn’t after it was established and you don’t know.

Yes, Brian that’s the very problem here in the first place. My right hasn’t been registered and that’s the one job you had to do for me.

@crainbf

This is absurd. The company registry is public anyone can look at it any time. There is nothing we can “withhold”.

I was unable to find this until you handed over directly.

gaiaus/ICF/blob/main/stiftung/CHE-199.569.367.pdf

You can simply prove that I can publicly find the document? Please share the online link here.

@crainbf

Again, if you genuinely believed you were on the board for this entire time while doing absolutely nothing, you were just extremely confused. That is not our responsibility or problem.

I genuinely believed that I was on the board where I can have an authority to monitor since it’s the establishment agreement and it’s insane to believe otherwise.

I didn’t ask you to solve my belated realization and disappointment that you didn’t keep the agreement. I am only asking you to keep it.

@crainbf

The Foundation Council is elected by the current FC members. Personally, I would vote against adding you to the board, because I would not want to work with you on the board and my impression from this conversation and our email threads is that it would make our job of creating an efficient and well-run organization harder and not easier.

Again, I don’t need your vote. Give me the financial reports and that’s my right.

What I only addressed through this entire thread was the importance of legally compliant organization and legal minded management. If you think this will make your organization or your life harder not easier, then you are the ones to blame, not me.

[SpaceMonster]

[quote=“Ash_Han, post:62, topic:11995, full:true”]

@crainbf

It’s our duty as a Swiss foundation to comply with Swiss law. It’s definitely not our duty to comply with whatever imaginary law applies in whatever country. And, once again, we never received any request for information or otherwise from any Korean regulatory and just from you personally.

This is the kind of deliberately obtuse bullshit you get from somebody who’s dog ate the homework.

[Rerarded]

Hello. A new law comes into force in 2024 (1.01.2024). I would read it. It talks about the founder and former members.

[jacobgadikian]

@Ash_Han

What I only addressed through this entire thread was the importance of legally compliant organization and legal minded management. If you think this will make your organization or your life harder not easier, then you are the ones to blame, not me.

Hi Ash, thank you for coming out and speaking out and thank you for founding the ICF. You have been so vital to the cosmos we love so much. So many of us here owe our careers to your decision to help @ebuchman and @jaekwon and @jtremback start the foundation.

I also do not understand @crainbf’s decision-making here but I think he is trying to do well, even if in this case I must respectfully disagree with his stance.

I think Brian has just entered an extremely challenging role.

I also think that the Cosmos SDK has solutions to situations like these, namely governance:

• https://forum.cosmos.network/t/demand-that-icf-provide-all-desired-info-to-ash-han

Once again, Ash, Thank you sir.

@crainbf thank you, too.