Call it Crowns, call it Estates, but you have reserved for you more Estates that the rest of your world could possibly collect toghether.
Not really sure where you got that information from but it's not factual and now I'm starting to regret not stepping in sooner to start clarifying things, especially if you're a representative sample of the community's understanding of the way VIVA was designed to work. But let me clarify...
The three founders were granted 1,000 Crowns each yes and that is no secret.
I know you probably don't care but here's the salacious details, since you say it's my defacto private business.
In my case, all my crowns are presently marked to be sold to be pay the debts of TQ. Alec's will be sold to resolve the NAOME debt. Dawn will be selling hers if the audit shows VHL owes a debt to either TQ, NAOME or VIVA Mexico. That's how VIVA works. You can carry debt for awhile, bit crash your business and your crowns can be seized and sold, not merely frozen, if the network cannot carry the debt.
Mine (TQ) crashed and at the moment up to 100% of my crowns (as well as whatever other assets I had in the system) are on the line. If it were to close out right now, I'd walk away with nothing for my five years of effort. Yet these modes were discussed in the whitepaper and I went into great depth in numerous discussions in chat and discord. I'm quite concerned it's not common knowledge by this point.
It is the process of assessing that debt, that has necessitated the audit and the auditors. It gets complex because TQ had it's own token (TQS) that was a revenue driver. Sales of TQS were used to fund VHL activities because TQ had a debt to VHL from the ICO that it was unable to repay right away due to issues with recovering assets from NAOME. At the time NAOME was in talks to be merged with VHL, so it was believed recovery would happen as part of those talks.
Thus technically TQ was in breach of it's fiduciary duty to VHL for most of the time it was in operation because funds from the ICO were not turned over nor segregated.
However ICO funds were actually raised for development of VIVA, but due to the free money bug (which we did not notice at the time due to being in active development and rebooting daily).
The ICO funds VHL had kept on the exchange, started slipping away to TQ customers. Since I was in charge of IT (and thus IT development) for both entities, these still represented a single bucket in my eyes and in the end I found out I was probably wrong about that and I will answer for that. I was trying to do the right thing always and while I documented the destination of funds, the source gets muddled because of this. Again the problem here was me, I'm not trained as an accountant and while we were searching for an accountant, it was my job to pay the bills on top of my IT responsibilities.
That's the corporate view of it. But the reality is there was a relationship between the entities with each of me, Dawn and Alec at the head of one org and the other two being partners.
Example. Dawn headed VHL, Alec and I were partners in it (even though some papers never completed, we did act as a partnership). I headed TQ and while there was nothing official because TQ was always a sole prop in search of a qualified buyer, we operated as though Dawn and Alec were partners in TQ until we could find someone else to take over the day to day tasks. NAOME is sort of an outlier here because Alec was president, but not the owner and the company had some complex agreements with his wife's family for ownership. This made things difficult for us to merge and the decision was made to form VIVA Mexico as a way to get around those difficulties. Again that would have been a partnership between Dawn, Alec and myself with Francisco at the helm. The costs of founding VIVA Mexico (including startup costs and salaries) were paid by TQ from funds which came from trading fees and TQS sales, although at the time they appeared to be coming from the ICO proceeds.
This makes for a very tangled knot with the books and it has taken a long time to sort out.
TQ carried the costs for most everything but when you pull back and look at this, there become questions such as when TQ paid a salary (because at the end of the day TQ paid everyone's salary), does that salary book against VHL, TQ or VIVA Mexico? You have people like Enrique that were employed by NAOME at the outset, but did not draw a salary from NAOME and instead drew a salary from TQ as soon as merger talks were floated. Does that represent a debt between TQ and NAOME? What about when his role switched over to primarily working for TQ and he only did NAOME customer service part time? We also went through 3 book keepers / accountants who couldn't keep up with it. Who did they work for? They kept books for VHL, TQ and VIVA Mexico & NAOME. They all drew a salary at first in cash (from Chase) and then through VIP draw downs and since most were in Mexico anyways, we sent them to the NAOME ATMs to collect their pay. How do you even begin to book things like that?
There's also the question of "what exactly constitutes a contract?'
In the USA a contract is valid if there are indications whether verbal or written of three items. Offer (I'll give you 1 of these for 2 of those), acceptance (Yeah, sounds good to me) and consideration (here's my 1 of these). Thus I've treated all contracts as "valid as stated" i.e. discussed. However in Mexico and many other countries, contracts are neither valid nor enforceable unless they are in writing in the local language and signed in the presence of a notary.
So what I viewed as "This person gave me their word and their handshake, so let's move forward". Worked out differently in practice. Where is the jurisdiction on these items? It becomes very important because NAOME did in fact receive money from VHL customers, which was never turned over.
There were also hundreds of thousands of pesos deposited on TQ at the request of NAOME for NAOME customers. These pesos were never received by TQ. So do we freeze all assets held by NAOME and it's partners?
These are questions, they are open questions and they are a primary source of contention and animosity between Dawn, Alec and myself. We don't air them because they aren't settled questions yet. We don't crack open the books for legal reasons, but also because there's active discussions about who owed what to whom and who really paid it?
So if you think I'm being brusque or trying to keep things private, it's only because you were never given the whole story. I operated in good faith with everyone under the assumption that everyone else was operating in good faith. And you know something? We still don't know that there was ever actual bad faith on the part of anyone. What we do know is that w dollars were raised in the ICO, x dollars were raised in TQS sales, y dollars went to startup and development costs and z dollars went out the window to customers from a bug that had I not been focused on the accounting aspects for 4 organizations, I probably would have caught months earlier. Assessing the values for w,x,y & z are the main thrust of the audit and when those numbers are known to me, I will make them known to you and everyone else. That's not what I would call private information.
My salary was 24 VIVA per day. In California my salary would be $250k per year and in my last job I was earning $180k. I choose to reduce in part because I live where I didn't need that kind of money, but also because I believe in the project and want to show that a person can live well on the VIVA living wage.
Dawn and Alec were given the same, as were all employees, because this is what we designed the system to pay every person who was active and working or retired. Keeping salaries capped like that allowed us to control labor costs and for things like customer service we could find great talent at that rate, but it was too low to attract top management talent; which would have allowed me to step back sooner and start letting someone else take over the day to day management had that happened, the free cash bug would have been caught a lot sooner and TQ would still be a going concern.
Never trust he who uses a thousand words when one hundred would do - Meesterboom 2018
I mean, right from the get go it is what you have done. Overwhelm with gross verbage, subterfuge and obfuscation.
You must be quite desperate to have come crawling back to steemit.
I wonder if it's that desperation or if its just contempt that leads you back?
Ps, don't answer with a thousand words if you have to answer at all