[Arm-netbook] Status update

[Paul Boddie]

On Monday, 21 November 2022 16:32:51 CET Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Monday, November 21, 2022, Paul Boddie <paul at boddie.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Apparently, asking Crowd Supply about project status tends to elicit a
> > response directing inquirers to the project creators.
> 
> Chris *is* one of the project creators.

Indeed, which is why I noted that Crowd Supply direct inquirers to you and 
Chris. Admittedly, you are the only one who seems to read this list and reply 
to messages. As far as I am concerned, this list is the venue to contact the 
project creators.

> this response is evasion by Chris.
> 
> he is in possession of 95 Cards and he is evading responding
> as to their whereabouts.
> 
> you need to *specifically* request him to answer solely and
> specifically "where are the 95 Cards sent to him in March 2020".
> 
> please PUBLISH the response, in full, here on the mailing list.
> we need a public audit trail.

Sorry, but why do I need to chase him up? The people who need to do that are 
Crowd Supply, instead of claiming that every project is either a success or a 
success still waiting to happen, which was effectively their response to me 
when I asked them what they do when projects are failing. Or maybe it is 
Mouser who have to get involved since they acquired Crowd Supply.

> > One is too busy and directs us to the other who is incommunicative.
> 
> wrong.

Well, that's what you've been doing. See above.

> i have been refraining from speaking publicly in order to
> protect Chris, who sponsored me with USD 50,000 of his company's
> money.
> 
> now that *you* have raised this publicly (not me) i can respond
> and correct mistakes that you make above.
> 
> over the past 2 years over 40 email messages have been sent,
> even Joshua Lifton has requested a phone call to be returned.
> multiple people have raised tickets on their support system.
> 
> in 20+ months we have not received ONE response.
> 
> you are literally the first person to have even confirmed that
> there is even two-way communication (even though it is evasion)

That is two-way communication with Crowd Supply not Chris. As in: people ask 
Crowd Supply about the status of this project and Crowd Supply tell the 
inquirer to talk to you and Chris about it. So, people post to this list and 
get told to ask Chris where the cards are. It is as if Crowd Supply had 
nothing to do with taking people's money.

> can you please try again, this time VERY SPECIFICALLY and ONLY
> asking "where are the 95 Cards sent to your premises, Mar 2020"
> nothing more. it is critically important NOT to ask anything else
> 
> the next logical followup question can then be sent but only
> AFTER that first question has been answered.
> 
> if you are unsuccessful (ignored like everyone else) then at that
> point i will have no other alternative but to publish the
> Crowdsupply Update that i have INTENTIONALLY not been publishing
> which informs 2,500 people that, effectively, Chris, despite
> being a project creator and financial sponsor, is in possession
> of 95 Production Cards that are legally the property of 95 of the
> Backers, and that he is refusing to say where they are currently
> located.  the reasons why i have refrained from publishing such
> an update should be pretty damn obvious.

We all know that he has 95 cards because you posted an update saying so two 
years ago. Sending a mail to him that he probably will not respond to isn't 
going to help. Besides, the backers have an agreement with Crowd Supply, who 
in turn have agreements with you and Chris, and so it is up to Crowd Supply to 
sort this out.

So, maybe it might be more productive for people to ask Crowd Supply what they 
are doing about this situation. If everyone gets fobbed off with the success-
in-waiting, "contact the creators" canned response, maybe it is worth 
escalating to a more senior level in Mouser. Of course, Mouser might know full 
well what they bought and don't care, either.

There are other projects on Crowd Supply that supposedly delivered, but where 
the community ended up picking up the pieces (thinking of the GnuBee devices 
that receive support via a Google Group). Claims such as "every project that 
has ever received funds through Crowd Supply has delivered to their backers 
(or is on track to do so)" [*] look pretty flimsy from the perspective of 
quite a few backers, I would say.

>From my own perspective, one of the most disappointing aspects of all of this 
is that an opportunity has been squandered. Looking back six or seven years 
ago, there was a lot of enthusiasm for a project that had the potential to 
really change things, but all that enthusiasm seems to have evaporated along 
with any kind of meaningful discourse. It seems like there was a performance 
taking place, but the show is now over.

Paul

[*] https://www.crowdsupply.com/guide/backer-protection