Mitchell:Patrick Stanley, Blockstack PBC’s former Head of Growth, served as interim head of the non-profit foundation while conducting an executive search for a permanent Chairman for the non-profit foundation, correct?Stacks Open Internet Foundation, Inc. (Stacks.org) seems like a company, holding IP and other key roles related to heading up growth. Finally, can you advise if you and Ms. Laughlin reports to the Stacks.co board of directors?Trust we are reaching out in good faith, given Stack.org's ownership of the 2.0 blockchain software and/or association with the "Network Security Law of the People's Republic of China" (applicable to data sharing with HK affiliates):
- Article 44: Internet platform operators shall assume data security management responsibilities for third-party products and services connected to their platforms, clarify the data security responsibilities of third parties through contracts and other forms, and urge third parties to strengthen data security management, and adopt The necessary data security protection measures.
If third-party products and services cause damage to users, users can request Internet platform operators to pay compensation in advance.The provisions of the first two paragraphs of this article shall apply to third-party products pre-installed on mobile communication terminals.- Article 46 Internet platform operators shall not use data and platform rules to engage in the following activities:
(1) Using the user data collected by the platform to implement differentiated pricing of products and services for users with the same trading conditions without justified reasons, such as actions that harm the legitimate interests of users;
(2) Use the operator data collected and mastered on the platform to implement lowest-price sales in product promotion and other behaviors that harm fair competition;
(3) Using data to mislead, deceive, and coerce users, impair users' right to decide on the processing of their data, and process user data against users' wishes;
(4) Setting unreasonable restrictions and obstacles in platform rules, algorithms, technology, traffic distribution, etc., restricting small and medium-sized enterprises on the platform to fairly obtain industry and market data generated by the platform, and hindering market innovation.We see a mutually advantageous opportunity to these issues at Stacks.org and associated Stacks.co third party collaborators.Let me know what you think.Thank you,GunnarOn Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 4:44 PM Mitchell Cuevas <mitchell@stacks.org> wrote:Thanks Gunnar, you were misinformed (as many folks in the Discord tried to explain to you).First, Stacks.org is not a company, it is a website. The website represents our efforts here at the Stacks Foundation where Brittany Laughlin (copied) is Executive Director. She is not involved in leading the CityCoins project nor are any other staff members of the Stacks Foundation.Further, to my knowledge, there is no 'Director of CityCoins', it is a community-run project with various groups and individuals contributing and no centralized leadership. If you'd like to know more about their organization, it would be best to get in touch with them. hello@citycoins.coOn Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 4:29 PM Gunnar Larson <g@xny.io> wrote:Mitchell:Thanks for the note.Can you clarify the relationship between Stacks.org and CityCoins? We were advised that the Director of CityCoins is also the Chair of Stacks.org?Whatever the case maybe, from the previous note we have an incline to approach your team related to LBO exploration.Would Lois be the best colleague to discuss the concept more?Sending you the very best.GunnarOn Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 3:57 PM Mitchell Cuevas <mitchell@stacks.org> wrote:Hey Gunnar, I'm assuming you're the same Gunnar was sending accusations at the CityCoins team via our Discord. If this notice was intended for that project, you can reach them through their channels: https://www.citycoins.co/.If you intended to send this to us here at Stacks Foundation, I've copied our legal counsel.On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 9:06 AM Gunnar Larson <g@xny.io> wrote:Dear Madam or Sir:Given that we are not a holder of STX and/or have not agreed to Stack.org’s Terms of Use, this claim is not subject to arbitration.
Full, fair, and accurate disclosures from all parties in a battle for corporate influence or control are critically important to investors, particularly when they are called upon to make decisions about their investments. Contemporary crypto computer crimes likely are key considerations relevant to making informed investment decisions by sophisticated investors, underscoring protection of pension assets via keen planning.
BitLicense marketplace manipulation techniques and potential cross-border computer crimes seem understood by Board Directors at Stacks.co and/or Stacks.org.
Computer crime fraud is a major issue for developing economies. Likewise, in western developed economies, market history warns that when boards of directors approve of and/or ignore the misuse of computer software programs which compute values based upon data input formulas from active cross-border manipulation structures, the results can lead to scandals like Enron. Such outcomes cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of affected companies collapse, while also shaking public confidence in the United States securities markets.
Enron’s Board of Directors: Contemporary Lessons on Crypto Marketplace Manipulation Computer Crimes
In its 2000 review of best corporate boards, Chief Executive Magazine included Enron among its five best boards. Even with its complex corporate governance and network of intermediaries, Enron was still able to "attract large sums of capital to fund a questionable business model, conceal its true performance through a series of accounting and financing maneuvers, and hype its stock to unsustainable levels."On paper, Enron had a model board of directors comprised predominantly of outsiders with significant ownership stakes and a talented audit committee of various state and federal regulators.
Two decades later, in 2021, it is clear that cryptocurrency and blockchain computer software systems require contemporary, ethically pure and sound cultivation to support the realization of a "generation of innovation," maximizing the full potential of blockchain software technologies.
Board directors that will pioneer the next chapters of the meaningful New York legacy of global, cross-border banking will agree:
Close scrutiny of corporate governance and greater responsibility placed on directors to vouch for the reports submitted to the SEC and other federal agencies have resulted in the growth of computer software solutions such as blockchain systems and processes.
Cryptocurrency and Blockchain computer software products allow corporate directors and internal auditors to assemble and analyze financial and other relevant data—including unstructured data—and create reporting required by New York BitLicense regulators and various Federal counterparts.
Before its demise, Enron was lauded for its sophisticated software, including financial risk management tools powered by computer software.
Risk management was crucial to Enron not only because of its regulatory environment, but also because of its business plan. Enron established long-term fixed commitments which needed to be hedged to prepare for the invariable fluctuation of future energy prices.
Enron's downfall was attributed to its reckless use of derivatives and special purpose formulas manipulated by computer accounting software tools. To engage in probable computer crimes, Enron hedged its risks with special purpose entities which it owned, and Enron retained the risks associated with the transactions.
Enron's aggressive accounting practices were not hidden from the board of directors, as later learned by a Senate subcommittee. The board was informed of the rationale for using the Whitewing, LJM, and Raptor transactions, and after approving them received status updates on the entities' operations. Although not all of Enron's widespread improper accounting practices were revealed to the board, the practices were dependent on board decisions.
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
xNY.io seeks relief to protect our enterprise and overcome any and all unnecessary delay or further loss or harm related to Stacks.co and/or Stacks.org’s interstate or international transmission of threats directed against computers and computer systems (aka the Bitcoin Blockchain).
As witnessed in New York State recently, top Stacks.co and Stacks.org leaders perhaps have ignored ethical rules by rationalizing away conduct known to be unethical standards of professional behavior.
More abstract-oriented discussions concerning whether society’s best interests are advanced with attempts to distort outcomes by discrediting the truth has even impacted virtual currency innovation out of New York.
Such practice of engaging in conduct that involves dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation is impermissible and should not be tolerated.
From our perspective, Stacks.co and/or Stacks.org have built entire global operations on the foundation of a “BitLicense Loophole” with intent to profit from various cross-border computer crimes such as market manipulation while being partially funded and/or directed out of New York. xNY.io is concerned that Stacks.co and/or Stacks.org has potentially ignored our interests ensured through interpretations of specific provisions in the existing national and supra-national legal framework (civil law, securities law, bankruptcy law) while engaging Stacks 2.0 blockchain software computer crimes.
Today’s memo is to seek further detail on the nature of Stacks Open Internet Foundation, Inc.’s California operations and headquarters. We would like to assess if Stacks.org is subject to California precedent concerning Negligent Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage.
Sending you the very best regards.
Thank you,
Gunnar Larson
----Mitchell CuevasFind me in the Stacks Discord community--Mitchell CuevasFind me in the Stacks Discord community