Hello! This is Greg Meredith (full name Lucius = light, Gregory = vigilant, Meredith = watcher of the sea; all of which means Lighthouse).

i don't frequent this forum, but i know that a lot of misinformation has been spread here. i want to take some time to lay out the case for your involvement, get you informed and show how you can help.

First of all, the Chain architecture that we promoted during the sale was agreed by Dor, Ed Eykholt, myself, and many others of the team. When the first draft of the architecture was produced, Dor insisted that it be renamed the Synereo architecture. This is a matter of record, and Ed Eykholt will testify to this.

Second of all, the architecture was part of an overall organizational plan that always included creating a non-profit company. The point of this company was to protect the commons. The RChain, itself, can be the basis many social applications, from jobs applications to dating applications - not just social network applications.

Moreover, it constitutes an alternative VM to the EVM, that runs on the blockchain. So, it's effectively a global scale smart contracting system with very specific features that would improve upon the EVM and provide scaling as well as correctness. Both of these come from embracing concurrency. They are talked about in our article on the rholang contracting language and how it prevents bugs like the DAO bug from ever being deployed /https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sGlObhGhoEizBXC30Ww4h1KHKGkmcy4NiCKitIBqiUg/edit?usp=sharing!

So, this is technology that rightfully belongs in the commons and should be protected as the commons, and so Synereo made the determination, just like Ethereum did, that we should and would set up a non-profit to protect that for all, but especially to ensure a vibrant ecosystem of applications that would create additional value for the attention economy. Thus, starting RChain Coop was not Greg splitting off, but Greg following the plan, as even MalthusJohn of the Synereo team, has repeatedly stated in the Synereo slack channel quite recently.

The claim that on RChain the AMP is devalued is also inaccurate. The whole idea of the multi-coin approach of RChain where eventually other coins can be exchanged for phlogiston (which plays the same role as gas in the EVM), is that it begins to piggyback on the other coins distribution network, while concentrating social value of the AMP in the attention economy layer. (See the architecture document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo/edit#heading=h.lr5urui9mldf ). The salient point is that AMPs alone are useful in the attention economy. Thus, if a dapp developer makes a dapp that uses a different coin, to make it social, using the service level contracts of the attention economy, their dapp is also tethered to AMPs, and thus, the other coins their dapp uses becomes entangled with AMPs. This greatly increases the reach and ultimately the value of AMPs.

These are all very positive developments. Regarding the less positive developments, Dor has stated on this forum that our differences prior to the sale were not major. This is false. Here's a letter from Eric Blomquist stating the time frame around when our differences were becoming problematic.

"... I can so comprehensively empathize with both your position and with Dor's position. The ugliness of your relationship that Dina and I so consistently experienced and foolheartedly thought we might be able to assist with while we were still in New Zealand (in March/April of this year) was laid bare for all to see publicly yesterday. Mediation and meditation has failed, your suggestion made in the middle of University Ave in Palo Alto this summer to split the endeavor should be heeded. What are you waiting for?"

The only reason i went along with the sale was that Dor gave me verbal and written assurances that my requirements for governances changes that would prevent the mess we are currently in would be addressed in a timely manner. There are eyewitnesses that have already testified to this on video. He didn't follow through. We went into mediation, and he still didn't follow through. So, i went public.

Dor, pretending to act on behalf of all of Synereo, has proposed a funding level for RChain that constitutes failure to deliver on its promises to investors. It is not a workable budget as the video'd budget reviews expose. (See the RChain youtube channel.) i made a counter proposal that Dor censored from the announcements channel of the Synereo slack.

Make no mistake. i will work on and deliver RChain and the attention economy to the community, regardless of what happens between Dor and myself. i owe this to investors and to the community. The issue here is that Dor is not deploying the funds in a way that matches the promises made to investors. Dor is lying in public and Dor is censoring the debate. Ask yourself, is this the sort of ethics and culture you want in your decentralized social network? This is what happens right at the very beginning before the existing alpha code becomes beta and you start having sensitive information in the network. How will it be later?

This is why i am making all this public. First of all vigorous debate is good! Second of all, scrutiny and diligence on your investment is good! This is why i have made it a point to hold weekly meetings in video show the work we are doing, give team updates and answer questions from investors. Its why the code is open source, and everyone has been encourage to download and try out the alpha. My work has always been very public and scrutinized, and the core algorithms peer reviewed in high profile conferences. So, focusing attention and making people really take a look at their investment is great! But the most important point of all is one of ethics. Is this the social network of making a quick buck, of trading AMPs on inside knowledge of how things are going inside Synereo, or is this the social network that belongs to the people? Because, if this does belong to the people, then censorship and pivots from promises to investors have no place in it.

Moving forward, if Dor does not want to accept the amendment to the counter proposal i submitted, and at least devote half of the funds investors wanted to go to RChain to the effort, then i suggest we split the coin, following Vlad Zamfiri's quite excellent and well thought out proposal.

How can you help? Reach out to others in the community and help them get informed. Reach out to shareholders, andy@synereo, James and Gigi at NFX, Simon Dixon at BttF, and Dor. Let them know your preferences. State in a clear and loud voice what you want for your network.

If you have any questions, i am always available. Don't hesitate to reach out. i'm leithaus on by synereonet.slack.com and rchain.slack.com. i'm here to serve.

Peace,

--greg