Yes, I’ve read it and I’ve also read the full chat between Nuno and him. Personally, it reads like it is written with a negative agenda as he specifically chose not to disclose a lot of information that Nuno provided him (school, university degree, companies he founded, skype, facebook, …). Instead, he chose to write an article that feels like an attack under the false pretenses.
Good that we're at least seeing a reply. The review looks to me as reasonably fair and balanced so when you say the writer did not disclose a lot of information this is the opportunity to share these details. I happen to have a very strong opinion on that companies should be proactive in transparency. Now you're leaving me and some others guessing which is never a good thing. Far from dreadful but UTRUST can really step up the communication game.
You do realise that our company has 15 engineers, not two, and if two of them signed up for something it doesn't mean this is the company profile we're using. Plus, even if we were using GitHub, the repositories would be private and not open to the public. You don't go to GitHub to lookup the source code of Windows either!
My apology, but you said that this Github profile was not yours. If one or even two employees of your company create a profile with your company's name, then it stands to reason to assume that this is your profile. Curious to see the new list of your engineers... seems you have expanded, because on your team page I only count 8 engineers.
- Simple: You need a permanent resident living in Switzerland to open the company type we chose. Just because there is only one director now, doesn't mean there is only ever going to be one. Our legal, financial arms and place of incorporation are in Switzerland (UTRUST Switzerland AG). Our operational branch (Engineering/UX/...) is in Portugal. More directors will be added in due time.
That doesn't make any sense (I live in Switzerland and I know a bit about how to form a company). Yes, you may choose one trustee or person who is a Swiss resident (yes, even one with a questonable background), but that doesn't explain why nobody of the actual team has been named a director. Why only in "due time"? There is no process involved in adding a director when the company is formed.
- First of all, they are not a dept-collecting company. They're a group that offer a variety of services, including debt collecting in some countries and compliance that we are contracting. There are very few KYC companies in the world that are FINMA approved, they are one of them.
Yes, of course they are a debt-collecting company. You can pretty-talk them as much as you want, but anyone in Switzerland knows (either from first-hand experience or from the frequent news coverage) who Intrum Justita is. They may have recently added KYC service, because they licensed IDnow eSign, but they are certainly not the only one offering that service - and
it's not Instrum Justita who is FINMA approved, as you say, but it is the IDnow eSign service (
https://www.idnow.de/) if at all.
- We are allowed to change the terms within certain boundaries at any given time, just like every other company in the world. Particularly when it comes to changing regulation, which in our case required us to enforce KYC on all participants, including pre-ICO ones. Naturally, this is not something we want to do as it costs money and is a hurdle/hassle for everybody. However, since we are a fully compliant ICO, we comply to the current law and regulations, and will continue to do so.
Again, what you are saying is untrue. You say yourself,
within certain boundaries, but nothing about your changes is within boundaries. These are two completely different terms. In this case, just like every other company, as you say, you would have had to at least offer any pre-ICO token owner the option to return the tokens. For example, you say now that I must not be a politically exposed person (PEP). But what if I am? I cannot agree to your new terms then or I would have to lie. But I do have tokens from the pre-ICO, where you made no such conditions. And I most certainly don't want my personal information to be shared with Instrum Justita - under no circumstance. The terms are so fundamentally different that it makes my head ache and I seriously question whether you're as transparent and professional as you like us to believe. Don't believe me? Compare them yourself:
Also goes for this particular post. Why do you choose to not reply to investigative questioning?
