FatMan

Donors could buy tokens and vote on DAO decisions. The fund would only take 2x back as profit when we win, as opposed to 4x or higher from traditional litigation funding. All funds raised would be held by these three individuals in a multisig wallet. (3/17)

And then, something a little unexpected happened: my Twitter account got a lot more followers. I realized at this stage that anything I put out would likely get a lot in donations fairly quickly, so I decided security had to be made far more robust than it currently was. (4/17)

Firstly, I insisted that someone trusted and public-facing should be added to the multisig. I suggested Cobie or a US law firm. The fund contacted a fourth lawyer (a legitimate one) and he was added as a multisig holder. I was relieved, and things were looking good. (5/17)

Sadly, today I learned some things about their structure that I didn't previously know - some things were misrepresented to me and some, admittedly, I didn't check up on due to being very busy at the time. One - the fee would not just be 2x - lawyers may take a cut too. (6/17)

Two - 50% of the tokens raised would be given to the multisig holders to 'slowly distribute' to the community. I assumed that all tokens would go to donors, and this part didn't really make sense to me - a legitimate DAO would not have this level of centralization. (7/17)

Three - proposals made on Snapshot for the DAO would be 'filtered'. This was revealed today, and it confused me - shouldn't DAO holders have a final say on what happens with their donations? Why should an internal group control proposals? (This reminds me of someone...) (8/17)

Over the past few days, they pressured me to release their links to the public ASAP. I was patient and I told them I needed some time to think. I'm glad I did. Due to these new facts, I have decided not to share their link with the public. There were too many red flags. (9/17)

This may sound like bad news, but there's a happy ending to this story that makes it all worth it. My Twitter account receiving this much exposure caught the attention of several high profile law firms and litigation funders from across the world, mostly the US. (10/17)