Topic: ***NEM*** Should NEM organize the second stakeholder list auditing ? - page 2. (Read 2689 times)

can we just let this go please? its stirred up enough trouble as it is and will only lead to more which will do far more damage to nem than a few sock puppets slipping through. please just let it go. try and think of new ideas to promote nem instead of arguing over this.

Heh, the sock puppets came out to vote "no" in force in the last 10 hours.

A new audit has some pros and cons:

  + new sockpuppets may be found
  -
  - some may become angry like in the 1st audit (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=496112.160 )
  - extra work ... but maybe it is now cheaper than earlier
  +
---------------
= I think that if a new audit can be done in the similar, "discreet" spirit like the 1st one, then ... why not.

Sounds good to me. Let them get out while NEM is cheap and let others come into the system instead.

Right now we are not issuing assets (temporarily) because someone scammed us out of 6 stakes.

What was final supposed to mean?

1. UP did an audit

2. A commitee did an audit

3. A public audit was done as well

*note* I got mine on the AE


This will harm NEM. Who started up this whole sockpuppet thing anyway.?
Isn't their many things that need to be done that we haven't done yet?

Hi bro, why not ?

as of right now, 20 people want a second audit, and 25 people don't want one. I don't think we can call it off yet.

ARGpentem will you be helping out with the audit if it happens, we need the community, dev and marketing team is quite busy.

The vote has answered this. Call it off. Community has spoken.

i voted no with 10 of my puppets  great vote!

~CfA~

I think anyone that had puppets has already converted to Nemtokens on the Asset exchange or will pretty fast if a new audit is on the cards. It dosnt really matter if they sold or kept their tokens as they will redeem them for NEM simply be sending the token to the issuing address

No way to do that, since AE is completely decentralized, theres no "admin" to talk to about this matter

This.  This makes the whole issue irrelevant.  

As well there's no conclusive proof that inactive accounts are sockpuppets.  There's many people who lurk and read Bitcointalk but simply aren't interested in any discussion on here.  The "call for participation" wasn't intended literally, it was legal wording to get out of any financial liability for running a securities.   While someone might not be active on Bitcointalk - they may be active on other social media websites or be really effective in viral P2P advertising.

My point is that we have too many "group 3", retroactively taking away their stakes (these people waited half a year) means NEM is going to create a lot of enemies overnight and I think that's more FUD worthy than any sockmaster boogeymen.  We know in NODE's case that (we take away the bull$hit intuition examples), they only found an extremely small number (compared to 1000 stakeholders) of sockpuppets.  So I stand by my conclusion that taking away stakes in mass is just going to piss off people and they'll be NEMs' worst enemies and they'll talk away any subsequent interested people.



The original issue here was someone scammed Pat of 6 or 8 tokens but that has nothing to do with sockpuppets, that was some guy who was looking up names on the stakeholder list and creating a copy cat name which look the same.

Then the people photoshopping banned photos to get NEMstake.

You know NEM must be really promising if people are resorting to weird ways to get it.