Hi Lauda,
all I know came afterwards by reading previous messages in that long thread, if you click the link I sent in my second msg (
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19574248) you will see what SebastianJU wrote himself, please take the time to read that and some further msgs (and believe me, many invested without knowing SebastianJU was removed in a timely manner because it was just before the ICO in the same day!!!).
I need a summarized timeline. Could you fill this in?
No problem, I assume you are asking about the SebastianJU issue first.
So, SebastianJU was used as escrow in their pre-ICO and, assumed to be used in ICO since they didn't update the information. I'll quote posts from that thread, the ICO was
15th of June, SebastianJU came to know (only by his own inquiry) he was not escrow anymore hours prior to the ICO, in 15th of June, they dismissed him without warning him or the other investors. See the timestamps.
PROOF:
UPDATE:Good news, everyone!
We've made the final arrangements with
SebastianJU about the SONM crowdsale escrow.
SebastianJU, the legendary bitcointalk escrow, will provide his escrow service both for the SONM preICO and ICO.All the preICO and ICO funds will be collected to his escrow wallet.
In a few days we'll announce the final version of the SONM whitepaper + the exact date of the preICO start.Stay tuned)
They didn't say anything, rebel.salesman is responsible for SONM threads and is a sonm members. Then we have SebastianJU message warning everybody as he came to know HOURS PRIOR TO THE ICO HE WAS OUT:
Hello everyone, SebastianJu here, official escrow of SONM. Normally I would have written something already days ago about how things will move and would have given more details. Unfortunately I lost contact with everyone from SONM some time ago. I requested to speak about and check the new contracts some time already and was told it will happen before the ICO.
Well, I often tried to get in contact the last days also, sent pm's on bitcointalk as well as email and dm's on slack to rebel.salesman, who normally is my contact, alexey and sergey. I was ignored except finally sergey answered me with the actual link to the ico contract on github. I checked and found it a bit strange to read nothing about anything pointing to the use of an escrow.
So I used a channel with sergey and rebel.salesman on slack and wanted things to clear. Time already was pretty far by that point because no one bothered to speak with me:
@channel it looks to me like there is no escrow involved anymore in the ico contract. I would appreciate to hear something else but the code leaves a different impression. Also you did not communicate with me at all about the ico even though I was told we would speak upfront about it. I tried to get in contact all the last days. Time is forward way too far now so it does not sound believable to happen. Also having too much work to do is not believable since the seamless work of the escrow part is fundamental for the safety of the ICO into both directions.
I do not know what happened. Maybe you would have wished to renegotiate the escrow fee. You did not try that at all. Maybe you wanted more safety... in that case I would have been able to bring in one or two other trustworthy escrows and create a 3 of 5 multisig. but no communication happened.
Guys, I will go to bed now. Please answer me in a proper way so that it looks like you take this serious. I hope this can be cleared earlier than 6 hours before the ICO starts.
I really hope you can tell me I interpreted everything wrongly.
Well, 2 hours earlier rebel.salesman answered me with this:
"Sebastian, hi, sorry for delayed response - lots of work to do at the moment.
We are going to use ICO smart contract with multisignature as the escrow. Multisignature will be held by Sergey Ponomarev, Alexey Antonov, and SONM advisers.
I'm really sorry we didn't contact you earlier to discuss it.
Lots of work is not an excuse, we should tell you about it before.
Anyway, it's pleasure to have business with you. Thank you for your help and your time during the preICO!"
So the ICO is NOT escrowed anymore. The invested funds will be held by the SONM team totally. I can not provide any safety from now on and
I need to take my name from the safety sign of the SONM ICO. Just to make clear that I will have no access nor control about invested funds.
Not sure what to say about that behavior. I believe nobody would have contacted me without me pressuring that way. People would have invested believing I hold the funds in escrow. Which is not the case.
Nobody contacted me about negotiating something upfront, telling me about a change or tried changing something in the deal for the ICO.
So that's what I unfortunately only found out by putting pressure on the topic.
So again... this ICO is not escrowed anymore. Funds will be hold and controlled by SONM totally from the start.
(part in bold is mine)
Screenshots taken by investors showing how SONM mislead investors in their ANN:
NO ESCROW ?? NO SAFETY ? invest at your own RISK !!!! I can't say this is true or not, but a member said this:Clients
https://icopromo.com Chronobank.io
TAAS.fund
SONM.io
All these projects are connected among themselves.
https://icopromo.com has an office at which people who write in branches of projects laudatory comments here at a forum work. It is about tens of multiaccounts on bitcointalk. I have also noticed their collective work in popular chats. Also
https://icopromo.com buys articles which praise projects.
And also Seed investments/VC investments is engaged that actually is receiving the credit in BTC which they invest on start to create illusion of successful ICO. After the termination developers return these means of icopromo.com for a part of collecting.
It is organized group of serial swindlers.
SebastianJU was removed to be replaced by a multi-signature of SONM team itself, as if this is really escrowing (granted, assuming they even did this in the first place)!! Of those mentioned in the post above was Chronobank whose CEO is a formal adviser of the project.
Then they sent some person to attack SebastianJU and trying to say it is safer having them as escrows than having third parties!!!
PROOF:
NO ESCROW ?? NO SAFETY ? invest at your own RISK !!!! we want clarification from the sonm team
SONM uses multisignature address; three people have a key, they are Sergey Ponomarev, Alexey Antonov and SONM's advisor, Chronobank CEO Sergey Sergienko. We think that the trust towards SONM team members and Sergey Sergienko is much higher than the trust towards one person who recieves all funds as an escrow. SONM team believes that paying commission to the escrow guarant is an unnecessary investor's money spenditure and we have no right to trust Sebastian the money raised as he's not an authorized representative. Sebastian's statements are likely to show his mercenary interests. SONM team had spoken to the advisors and made the described decision
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/19887061/27184110-b4e81a74-51e9-11e7-8307-c5533fdb5aad.pngThe individual above seems to be SONM team member by reading his msgs. SebastianJU replied to that accusation, very typical of SONM people, to accuse and harass people in their way -- notice the first troll they sent asking me for details I already provided
a dozen times and will again.
Also, isn't it funny the guy says "the escrow guarant (sic) is an unnecessary investor's money spenditure (sic) and we have no right to trust Sebastian the money raised as he's not an authorized representative", but yet USED HIM IN PRE-ICO AND TOLD EVERYONE HOW GREAT WAS HAVING HIM AS ESCROW!!!
Sebastian's reply:
guess I need to answer here also.
not sure about what "mercenary interests" mean.
in any case I am not the only escrow available. there are a lot of trustworthy ones on bitcointalk and I could have suggested some that are honest and trustworthy. a multisig escrow address could have been created involving the escrows and the team raising the security considerably. though there was no try to speak about something like that. the preico was held by me alone and for sure for the ico would have been something more safe needed. As well as proper rules of partly releasing the funds.
regarding escrow fees... everything could have been negotiated which also did not happen.
I somewhat can understand why they do want to hold the funds that way though I think they miss the importance of the independent party part. they want to set on the trust investors have in the keyholders which they are free to do. Though I have to take my name out in order to not held viable about funds I never held.
See how SebastianJU was calm, well-balanced in all messages, and they accused him of being a mercenary? Only because he asked a sum for his services they disagreed? Very, very telling the behavior. And absolutely shady what they did.