I think tempus has raised some important questions here. I look forward to seeing some proper responses. So far they seem poorly thought out.
Could you rephrase a question whose answer you consider poorly thought out?
I think that was a poor choice of words on my behalf. What I meant was that some of the responses lack specific details, however, it may be that you have already posted answers that I have missed or that some things have not been finalised yet.
The thing that I would really like more clarity on is why you think KYC/AML is not required for the HEAT tokens given the presence of fiat gateways? Have you had any legal advice on this matter? I think the fact that you will have conventional fiat funding rounds/shares is likely to make this project stand out even more to the financial authorities. Like I said some more details on the reasoning here would be useful for investors.