Daniel Krawisz, Mycelium former backend developer, resigned following a realization of an inappropriate conduct.
Krawisz thoroughly detailed that he is leaving Mycelium because of apparent fraud and mishandling of ICO funds which was said to be spent outrageously for the company’s Development Team vacation to Spain.
Last year, Mycelium organized an ICO crowdfund proclaiming publicly that they are raising money as necessary to fund for their future updates.
Mycelium is a wallet provider company who appeals that their development team has been functioning together prior to Bitcoin’s initiation. This company from Cyprus has released numbers of Bitcoin wallet linked products to the market.
The organized event was said to be generated for the customers to have an opportunity of becoming stakeholders in Mycelium. The company claimed that the employers are working as for functional, reliable products to provide the necessities of both amateur and professional Bitcoin customers for them to be ready for the upgraded Mycelium.
ICO found that only 5% was disseminated from the Mycelium’s ownership to the token holders.
Daniel Krawisz realized and witnessed the misappropriation of the raised funds of Mycelium and decided to resign. He said that the company bought a vacation to Spain for the company’s developers after the tokens were sold. It was said to be just a vacation because there is no work related activities done there.
According to the law, the act was illegal and a form of conflict of interest. This could be taken to the courts and if they are proven guilty, they could spend years in jail.
Mycelium has already issued statements impugning Krawisz’ allegations, but the company’s reputation has been stained by the story.
In defense of the company, Dmitry Murashchik, Community Manager of Mycelium, said that they had a company retreat or a get together to strategize on how they should go forward and believe that it should be done first in the personnel.
With the accusations of corrupting funds against Mycelium, allegations that ICO established an illegal dissemination of unlicensed securities and authorities probing the possibility that Ethereum foundation may perhaps played a violation of conflict of interest laws in their conducting of the DAO fiasco. This seems proportional to an eventual crackdown on ICO upcoming deals.