Be aware that anything like this would distract @Seneca from building Decorum at a crucial time with respect to the development of the network and the project. After waiting this long, I would prefer all effort to focus on delivering the code.
Obviously I think those who bought PDC should have their say, but the promise @Seneca made was to deliver Decorum and I think the decision is his.
He can simply add liquidity to UniSwap and people who want to sell there. He can convert part of the BTC in to wBTC and adds it directly there.
Noted but my stance remains.
.
Had I know that money was just standing there in the account doing very little all those times that Dirvine and maidsafe were looking and struggling for funding. And the same time knowing that the success on this project is unmistakably tied to the success of maidsafe completing the network. This is especially true right now much more than before.
.
If Seneca had offered to for example buy maidsafecoins from Maidsafe or just donated 50% of their holdings or bought maidsafe the company equity or some other plan to support directly the building of the network because they would support their investors that way - that would have made sense. But right now having $17 mil in the account while the funding for the company actually building the network remains as huge a question mark as always is just…crazy in my opinion.
.
edit - if Seneca offers a reasonable proposal to use a big part of the $17 support maidsafe the company building the network then I personally would see that as more important than getting my invested funds back
Everyone would think what else to do with that Bitcoins and MAID, but it was not always worth that much. Quite recently we had Bitcoin bellow $4k while MAID @ $0.15
Anyway if there is way how to support development of API some way it could help a bit.
I’ve offered a significant loan to MaidSafe in the past of which only a little more than half was accepted. I have no more clue about MaidSafe’s finances than any of you, but if MaidSafe was really on the verge of going under I would expect they’d at least send an e-mail back at least about the remainder, possibly under better terms. My guess is that currently they feel just throwing more money at it wouldn’t make development go faster, maybe even create more distractions.
@Seneca and @bzee I know you’re both semi discouraged and losing motivation but look back into what got you so excited in the first place.
I thought I remember you guys loaning to Maidsafe and I thought it was a good use of stagnant funds. So I think your contribution there should be worth people thanking. Personal thank you from myself.
Keep your chins up. This could and should be it.
What exactly are you hoping for?
Buyback for the fiat equivalent of what you invested?
Buyback at the buy in plus appreciation in btc price?
Something different?
Fair enough. And you remind of a valuable point that throwing more money might not make SAFE come to life faster, better etc but might actually turn out to be the opposite. Quite true.
.
My emotions have calmed and I apologize for any remarks I have made that have been offencive in any way.
.
The truth is that there is no one to blame here. Seneca you proposed the project in good faith. The investors gave money in good faith. Maidsafe team were working on the network all in good faith. None of us could possibly have known what the difficulties would be and how long it would take.
.
That all was 5 years ago. Every one of us involved is free to draw their line at some point. Some did it years ago already and some might do it in another few years or some maybe will never but for me I have come to realise the time has come to let go of this project.
.
We all wanted success. Some believe success is yet to come and that may be but I am folding. Can anyone really be blamed for wanting to quit? It´s been 5 years.
.
I would very much like to take a proportional cut from the leftover funds as per my initial investment amount. In return I will return the PDC coins. They can be burned to decrease the remaining supply to benefit the holders that remain or the coins can go to the project either way I do not mind.
.
Then this investment would not have been a failure in my eyes but actually a surprising good fortune investment.
.
I ask you Seneca to think about this. Take a week if you have to. I actually wrote Panda a personal message to say that I would also like to join a possible lawsuit if it comes to that but after calming down I actually will not fight this. I do not want to get myself more waiting and dragging on. Like I said it is time for me to finish this, with a payment or without.
.
Disclaimer: I have about ~90000 PDC (so I am looking for a little less than 1btc)
Whatever buy-back I offer you I must offer to everyone else, I naturally can’t play favourites. Such a proportional buy-back would effectively elevate PDC to equity with rights to claim the project’s assets. This would open up the risk of total or near-total wipe out of reserves, effectively killing the project. The continuous choice I made to be conservative with the reserves and to not cash it all out into fiat currency, would then turn from something prudent into the undoing of the project instead.
I appreciate you speaking in good faith @anon96570664, so please read the following as general observations and statements of mine, not directed at you personally. I’d rather be clear about it all in one post than do so in little parts.
My primary responsibility is to make decisions that I believe to lead to the greatest chance of successful realization of the vision and goals as presented since the first announcement of the project and at the time of the crowdsale. I dislike legal speak as much as anyone here, but for clarity’s sake, PDC has never been equity, and thus PDC owners are not shareholders. The purchase agreement and risk disclosure documents can still be re-read on the website.
I won’t put the financial interests of PDC owners above the future of the project as long as MaidSafe is still working on SAFE and the road to realization is still open. In the mean-time I’m open to the idea of an optional PDC buy-back as an act of good faith, so that any crowdsale participants who feel they’re stuck and don’t want to wait any more can exit with good profit. So this would definitely be in excess of the fiat value transacted at the time of the crowdsale.
I understand any buy-back participant would always like to receive more, but a claim on the full appreciation in value of the project’s assets is neither reasonable nor realistic. It was never part of the agreement, it would badly damage the project’s future, and in the end, courts measure financial losses denominated in the legal tender (currency) of their jurisdiction (at least in the case of purchases and investments, not when custodians lose your property such as Mt. Gox). They also measure opportunity cost in market conform interest rates, not in the price appreciation of a volatile asset that one might’ve sold oneself at any time since the crowdsale. The buy-back offer would exceed that resulting number in the first place.
So for the final value per PDC to be offered in this buy-back, I would attempt to balance as best as I can the long term interests of the project with my ethics and sincere appreciation for the patience and good will of this community. If that’s not satisfactory, then don’t participate in the buy-back and try to sell to someone else later, or wait until SAFE is live and the project comes to fruition and they can be used for their intended purpose (global endorsements not dependent on the “web of trust”). I have to be immune to pressure in this, or else it could result in endless fights and other nastiness where every concession of mine would result in more pressure, and such an environment in this community would be poisonous to everything we hope to achieve.
I hope you understand, and I thank you all again for your trust and patience.
This is MASSIVELY overlooked IMO and an absolute credit to your morality. Hats off to you. We are getting there and hopefully all going well decorum will follow. Nothing is guaranteed and in all honesty, the fact you still have reserves to achieve that is amazing. Then the fact you still have the energy is equally excellent. All we can do for you is what we are currently doing and I hope in the near future you will have your API, that goes for all devs as well. We are very aware of this current lack, but when we have stability the API will follow quickly, the real API this time not one built on a non network, but one running on a running decentralised network.
Very well put.
This is why I was asking what panda expected out of it.
As you have stated it could be the undoing of the progect if you were to offer all you had.
Thanks
There will always be dissatisfied people and there is no way to please everyone. A big part of the problem, in my opinion, is that the token has not been traded on any exchange for years. A lot of projects I follow solve this problem with UniSwap. I personally would buy more PDC if there was liquidity (While the token was actively traded, I managed to acquire 12 times more than from the public sale).
Anyway, thank you for your efforts over the years and I want you to know that you have my support and I am sure the support of many other people too. Don’t let the small but vocal dissatisfied people influence you. 
Thank you for your answer. I feel that I have been heard.
What you say is reasonable and I am looking forward to the terms and specifics of the buy-back.
I’ve not commented on this thread, as I’m not a PDC holder. I feel I need to make a couple of points, which I hope are salient.
I didn’t buy into PDC, as the risk profile felt too high for me. MAID was risky enough, as delivery was uncertain. To invest in a project being built on top of this obviously multiplied the risk. I presumed everyone was performing similar analysis and either accepted the risk or rejected it.
I still think it is a cool project regardless. Safe Network will need something like this. When the time comes, I am certain it will be an interesting and rewarding experience for the development team involved. It isn’t every day that you have a runway to develop something green field, on a platform that you have a passion for.
It is an awkward situation for sure. I’m glad @Seneca has posted and clarified their position. I hope middle ground can be found for those who wish not to wait. I also look forward to seeing a working Decorum on Safe Network… that will be awesome!
That seems spot on @Seneca.
I’m not invested, I don’t have any credibility, but as an everyday folk, I must say that if I had put 5BTC in this in 2016, I would want it back by now myself.
It seems natural. No delivery, a huge BTC price change, a decent MAID price change in the meantime. Nothing is like what it was when the deal was sealed, and nothing is what people thought it was gonna be.
The world has changed. People’s priorities have changed. The only thing that has not changed is the Safe Network can’t be built upon yet and the project Decorum can’t be delivered.
From my limited perspective it seems totally fair to compensate folk in BTC and redo the ICO once the path is clear/when it becomes obvious the SAFE Network can be built upon.
Different option. Imagine the possibilities.
He has made the correct decisions thus far.
The wait may be worth far more than you think.
I think what folk are missing here is the old government controller TAX. At the time Decorum accepts investment/tokens/crowdfund the £ $ Value is considered as the income. Any CGT etc. is all based on FIAT.
The fact some token etc. went up or down in value is something regulators etc. don’t care about it’s all tax on fiat value. So if folk invested $10 then what the $10 back is a decision @Seneca can make. There are still legal issues to consider as it can be seen as a stock buy back (even though it’s not stock per se’). Decorum is not in liquidation or similar, Harmen has worked honestly and from a business perspective with great honour.
So I think everyone needs to stop thinking they get back a choice of currencies PDC/Maid/BTC and choosing the best-inflated one. It won’t work like that, it’s all fiat values you need to consider and the vehicle used to transfer the fiat value is irrelevant.
I hope this helps, but tax/law etc. trumps us all here and we need to abide by it, like it or not.
I don’t know why it’s so hard to understand - the Bitcoin of the Decorum team is their money. Our money is the PDC token…
It’s also not how the world works to say, I can understand why people want this or that, it seems fair, therefore…
People change their minds all the time and that is one of the reasons people make binding contracts, and that we have a legal system to arbitrate disputes. The only thing that matters here is the agreement made, its standing in law, and anything that has a legal bearing on that. It doesn’t matter that some now want out at an incressed valuation. Of course I understand that, but it’s irrelevant here. If you’ve been investing or doing business through contracts you surely realise this. Try this approach with any contractual partner and see where it gets you.
I’ve seen people who owned part of a company have to give up the shares they earned for a pittance when they left because they gave up waiting for the company to exit. If they had stayed, instead of a couple of hundred quid the value of those shares would have been considerable. But they changed their minds about staying and have to live with that.
I’m only glad @Seneca remains committed to his side of the agreement. He’s had to wait too, and deal with all the paraphernalia needed to carry out his responsibilities to protect himself and those who invested. He might easily have had a change of mind because of what’s changed and how long this has run.
But he remains committed, and everyone who did invest in this project should take heart from that IMO. It’s rare. We’re lucky to have that commitment and integrity.