puzzles 🧩 on Nostr: The hypocrisy has to stop By running both a VC fund (1031) and Open Sats a 501c you ...
The hypocrisy has to stop
By running both a VC fund (1031) and Open Sats a 501c you create a bias. You can’t have a fiduciary responsibility to your investors and allocate to FOSS devs without a bias no matter how you structure these entities.
Let me paint scenario where an open source dev is looking to make a 1031 funded company obsolete, would open sats fund it? I have a hard time believing open sats would especially since Odell would be liable for damages for breaking his fiduciary responsibility.
The biggest problem is that Open sats doesn’t fund anonymous developers. That means if Satoshi had come to Open Sats for funding he would have been denied.
Open Sats would be better off creating a list of devs / projects for people to zap / crowdfund instead of being a middleman.
I already know -oUr dOnOrS need tax deductions.
Say it out loud then
The entire existence of open sats is to give donors tax breaks and KYC devs.
cool got it
By running both a VC fund (1031) and Open Sats a 501c you create a bias. You can’t have a fiduciary responsibility to your investors and allocate to FOSS devs without a bias no matter how you structure these entities.
Let me paint scenario where an open source dev is looking to make a 1031 funded company obsolete, would open sats fund it? I have a hard time believing open sats would especially since Odell would be liable for damages for breaking his fiduciary responsibility.
The biggest problem is that Open sats doesn’t fund anonymous developers. That means if Satoshi had come to Open Sats for funding he would have been denied.
Open Sats would be better off creating a list of devs / projects for people to zap / crowdfund instead of being a middleman.
I already know -oUr dOnOrS need tax deductions.
Say it out loud then
The entire existence of open sats is to give donors tax breaks and KYC devs.
cool got it