I don't believe you and David respect that fact, otherwise you wouldn't be raising the possibility of there being a fork that dosn't include the original ICO investors. You're refusal to clarify that matter shows a lack of respect for the original supporters of IOTA.

What makes the situation doubly concerning is the donations are totally unnecessary, as a premine achieves the fund raising outcome we all seem to agree on perfectly well, so as I speculated, I think the reason for your preference for donations is not related to neutralizing the 'bystander effect', but more likely for some other legal reason, which is fine by me, but why wont you guys be upfront? This obfuscation of the facts, combined with David's threatening and insulting tone to supporters like myself recently is a red flag.

I can handle David insulting me and others, but I don't like his chances of navigating the path ahead for IOTA with such an overly macho and immature style. That style from a project manager doesn't work unless he's also the code guy, in which case people have to suffer in silence and put up with the BS. In David's case he'll simply be replaced by a more professional person at a later date, but by then he will have had plenty of time to poison the well with key stakeholders and partners. I've been in business for 20+ years and that's the way it works. Managers can only act like David if they're irreplaceable, and David is easily replaced, so eventually key interests will want him removed, and that's going to be messy. He wont go quietly and will try and lob grenades as he goes. His involvement from here on with IOTA makes the future less certain.