Quote from: true-asset on July 13, 2014, 08:27:14 AM

Quote from: cryptshine on July 12, 2014, 03:15:11 AM

Quote from: Cryptourologist on July 12, 2014, 02:30:05 AM

My post seems to have gone missing for some reason. Let's do it once more...

Not to troll or FUD, but why does a multi-million dollar corporate alliance need donors to come up with (relatively) puny 10BTC to expand their userfrendliness. I'm not a whale and I could only commit 2BTC to a proof of urea purchase and delivery. After all, when (if?) that irrefutable proof comes in I'll make much more on URO. Yet, even to me, 10BTC is not that much...

My train of logic is that even though the 4 companies are backing and supporting URO. They cannot be seen as directly funding it. It is in everyone's interest that URO remains an independent community that is not directly funded by any third party but by the community and it's supporters. This would be very important to get other suppliers to sign on in the future.

Thank you for your correct answer cryptshine. The Uro Foundation is independent from the 4 companies that have ratified the Uro Protocol so far and will continue to remain independent in order to attract more and more commodities firms in the coming months and years. The Uro Foundation has never received any funding from any of the 4 merchants that have so far agreed to accept Uro for Urea purchases under the agreed pegged ratio and under the current structure will never seek funding from other parties for the purpose of running the Foundation itself. We believe this is an important element of neutrality that will benefit Uro greatly in the longer term.

Where did the 88BTC for this https://twitter.com/UroFoundation/status/487311148056731649 come from? I bet there's a better use for them...