A contractor presented themselves to the CCS for the sole purpose of creating a Multi-OS Haveno App using a portion of funds from the abandoned Haveno frontend proposal. 1 (of which 378XMR remain)
There has since been a public controversy surrounding this proposal/contractor. 23
The CCS itself is devoid of opinion/emotion regarding 'extra curricular' activities. 4
As per the Community meeting on December 7th 5, the partial payout request was unanimously denied.
During this meeting, Woodser, the lead developer of Haveno suggested 6:
[a] deadline to release the code, in hopes of getting the code for the greater benefit of the project
Whilst the majority voted to close the proposal with immediate effect.
Community trust and sentiment plays a significant role in our Crowdfunding System. For this contractor, it has been irrevocably and permanently lost.
On December 10th the contractor was explicitly informed7 to not expect payment outside of milestones 2.
"Work done as per your proposal is work paid":
As per the contractors own admission8 on December 21st via another partial payout request, the work is not done.
The decision is simple and the contractor is to blame. They:
Will not continue working on the proposal until a partial payout is made. (This will not happen again)
Demand a decision as soon as possible.
All deadlines have passed:
The latest, mentioned by the contractor in their own proposal (31st December)
The community calling for immediate closure (December 7th)
One mention of allowing an extra week to complete9 (December 14th).
Given this, the expert witness review will now focus solely on:
Validating the legitimacy of the previous Milestone 2 payout (75 XMR)10.
Assessing the utility of the existing open source code for future development.
If Milestone 2's work meets the proposal requirements and the existing source code is of high quality, despite being incomplete, a new team or contractor can continue the development after a more stringent vetting process if the community wishes to continue this venture.
Should the review expose any shortcomings in the payout review process, these will be addressed moving forward.
