UtopianFuture did not scam anyone. What he did was equivalent to buying fake likes on Facebook and Twitter. All he did was create sockpuppet accounts, to pad popularity in the initial weeks of NEM, and he later took them off the stakeholder list. This is a tactic done by practically every coin out there. Satoshi likely had a dozen aliases in 2009 to promote Bitcoin.
Think hard about it - UtopianFuture had nothing to do with the taint analysis (others were in charge and it was open to anyone willing to volunteer). If UtopianFuture still had his sock puppets then he would had been busted hard, no way (under any fantasy scenario) could he had kept 100s of sockpuppets (let alone a dozen or five of them).
UtopianFuture at best probably only had 2 to 5 sockpuppets total (later removed) but now he has zero and persumably no developer stake anymore.
You don't know any of this. All of your words are 100% conjecture.
No, they are not. Anyone who is familiar with NEM would know that we had an open, transparent, taint analysis which last for several months. Anyone was able to review the list of stakeholders and weed out sockpuppets, hundreds were removed that way. UF's sockpuppet accounts were gone from the list before taint analysis began and the registrations ended.
You keep trolling and insisting that UtopianFuture had 100s of sockpuppets but it's a rhetorical fallacy as taint analysis would had weeded him out months ago, and that hypothetical scandal which would way worse than UtopianFuture padding fake popularity in NEM back in January.
The reality is this - NEM has over 1000 veteran stakeholders and it has the fairest distribution in crypto history. That's compared to your NxT / Qora / Sim which had distributions to less than 100 accounts (of which, due to lack of taint analysis, was arguably only a dozen or so real people).
.
UF has already admitted to having more sockpuppet accounts than you are willing to admit he had, ergo, your opinion is meaningless.