6 ms·

Looks like you're a UK CIC, which means you're regulated like a company, and your CEO/Director has statutory responsibilities. If he is failing to dispense his

by choult 4y ago

Looks like you're a UK CIC, which means you're regulated like a company, and your CEO/Director has statutory responsibilities. If he is failing to dispense his duties, he could be struck off as a company director in future. He incorporated a Limited company called Fosshosts Projects Ltd. last year, on his own. It'll be struck off in the next two months due to failure to file. He also has another company currently in protracted liquidation, and it sounds like he is failing in his responsibilities there too. The guy either sounds shady, or in a deep mess.

toomuchtodo 4y ago
Can anyone file a complaint for authorities to investigate? It sounds like embezzlement of organizational funds might be a possibility and it warrants whomever oversees non profits in the jurisdiction asking some questions.
- maxbond 4y ago
  It's just as likely they're having a mental health crisis of some sort (in my experience this is generally why people on the Internet go nonresponsive), I'd really encourage people not to call the cops on people in a situation they can't understand or get eyes on. It can make a bad situation much, much worse. It's even entirely possible for both things to be true, eg, for someone to have a medical crisis in their family, which leads to a series of desperate decisions including misappropriating the funds (I recall a former HN user who did a Kickstarter that ended this way, where they had an issue paying rent and a mental health crisis while they were trying to deliver on their Kickstarter - I don't think they've been active online since, further isolating them from their community and support network). Would law enforcement help that situation? Absolutely not, even if the money was recovered it probably wouldn't be worth it.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    I mean no offense to those having a mental health crisis, it happens (I have had one myself), but that also doesn't mean a non profit should have its funds walked off with (regardless of why). I've reported non profits to the IRS in the US when it appeared they might not be entirely above board, and I never felt like I was "calling the cops" in the same way I would where they're going to break down someone's front door; it's asking people who are tasked with oversight to do their job. Unequivocally, I hope this person gets whatever help they need if they need help, regardless of the outcome of this non profit.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      I understand you didn't feel that way, but I think maybe you should do a thought experiment of what "doing their job" would mean? Once those events are set in motion, you can't control how they unfold or predict the outcome; even if that person didn't do the thing you were worried about, law enforcement may well find some reason to antagonize or imprison them. I'd encourage people not to contact any law enforcement entity of any kind if they don't have a really solid understanding of the situation. Consider this story from a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33626670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33626670 where someone called the cops because they were concerned that they saw a child walking alone, and the mother ended up going to jail. That wasn't the intention of the person who called the police; but once you invite law enforcement into someone else's life, you have no idea what they will do and you have no power to recall them. 'pessimizer relayed a similar experience yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33836312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33836312 I honestly encourage everyone to consider whether letting it go is the best thing to do in any given situation. Someone might've stolen money? Contacting law enforcement probably won't get it back. An organization is dissolved? We can form it again, with a structure that ensures a higher bus number. These are things we can control, and where we can predict the outcome.
      - imperfect_blue 4y ago
        The purpose of reporting crime is not to receive compensation; it's to create a norm where crime is punished and hence deterred. It's a societal benefit not a personal one. It's not good that miscarriages of justice do happen, but that doesn't change the overall point.
        danielheath 4y ago
        Given that miscarriages of justice happen, maybe calling the cops speculatively is not a great plan?
        maxbond 4y ago
        I understand the principle of what you're advocating for, but the unfortunate reality is that miscarriages of justice are the norm and not the exception. I'd put forward another principle; it is better to let 1000 guilty parties go free than to condemn 1 innocent party (and "innocent" here should be taken to include people who are committing a "crime" that is normally tolerated, employed as an excuse to arrest someone - each of us commits dozens of these "crimes" regularly, without realizing it). When we reflexively invite law enforcement into other people's lives, when we do not and cannot understand the situation at hand, we are not likely to promote a societal good. We are far more likely to promote a societal ill; that of overpolicing. I'd encourage people to think of law enforcement as an adversarial entity, constantly trying to do everyone in, who needs your invitation to act. It might be because they need to drive their performance metrics up, it might be because they're overzealous in the pursuit of what they view as justice, we can't really know and it doesn't matter. When you give them that invitation, they will make the absolute most of the opportunity. If you invite that monster into someone else's life - you had better be damn sure that they are a real threat to the community. You don't want to ruin (or perhaps end) someone's life over a miscommunication.
  - TheBrokenRail 4y ago
    Having a mental health crisis should not mean that you're free of consequences. It's not like random people are driving up to their house to harass them, they're reporting them to a regulatory body who will investigate themselves and prosecute if needed. And if they are having a mental health crisis, they should be able to plea insanity. All is this is compounded by the fact that, at least according to another commenter, they're head of operations at another company. If someone in control of a lot of money with duties to other just vanishes (and according to other commenters, they do have legal duties in the UK), they should face consequences. People didn't donate to Fosshost so one person can disappear and take their money with them.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      > It's not like random people are driving up to their house to harass them When you direct law enforcement to investigate someone, you should anticipate this as a strong possibility. > And if they are having a mental health crisis, they should be able to plea insanity. I think the bar for this is much higher than having a mental health crisis, and that even if successful it won't result in you maintaining your liberty but being institutionalized instead of imprisoned. But IANAL and certainly not a UK lawyer (barrister? solicitor?). > [T]hey should face consequences. Personally I don't buy the notion of retributive justice. It seems like the volunteers of Fosshost are taking lessons from all of this, and creating a new project with better governance. I think that's a productive and healthy response, and the place where effort should be focused. To me, creating a new, better project to continue the mission, that's what justice is. That's what people donated their money to do, too; to support the mission. Personally, I plan to donate to their new project. I'm not in a position to contact authorities (as I had no involvement in their last project), but I wouldn't if I could. Everyone makes up their own mind about these things, but I hope anyone considering contacting law enforcement really weighs the potential for harm and what exactly the likelihood of a good outcome is (and what that even means) before acting.
      - phendrenad2 4y ago
        Well, your sentiment is nice and all, but you're effectively dooming every nonprofit to spectacular dissolution if their CEO decides to not answer the phone. Non-profits, you know, those things that are supposed to serve the public good? But I guess public good is on hold if the CEO goes AWOL.
  - nibbleshifter 4y ago
    Healthcare in the UK is free.
    - xnorswap 4y ago
      I love the NHS and have written previously in defence of it but mental healthcare is practically non-existent with extremely long waiting lists and you really need to know what you're expecting to get from it to get anything at all from it. Unlike physical health, it does not work to help those who really need it.
      - DanBC 4y ago
        So, uh, yes, but it's very dependent what bit of England you're in and what bit of mental health service you're trying to access. I'm not disagreeing with you btw, the picture is pretty bleak for very many people. Some of the data is here. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/mental-health-services-monthly-statistics https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/sta... And the IAPT data is here (although in many places IAPT has been diluted so much it's not giving much meaningful benefit) https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/psychological-therapies-report-on-the-use-of-iapt-services https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/sta...
- remram 4y ago
  Anyone who donated could probably file a complaint. They accepted donations from individuals in the name of the CIC: http://web.archive.org/web/20221123174539/https://fosshost.org/donate http://web.archive.org/web/20221123174539/https://fosshost.o...

by choult 4y ago

toomuchtodo 4y ago

Can anyone file a complaint for authorities to investigate? It sounds like embezzlement of organizational funds might be a possibility and it warrants whomever oversees non profits in the jurisdiction asking some questions.

maxbond 4y ago
It's just as likely they're having a mental health crisis of some sort (in my experience this is generally why people on the Internet go nonresponsive), I'd really encourage people not to call the cops on people in a situation they can't understand or get eyes on. It can make a bad situation much, much worse. It's even entirely possible for both things to be true, eg, for someone to have a medical crisis in their family, which leads to a series of desperate decisions including misappropriating the funds (I recall a former HN user who did a Kickstarter that ended this way, where they had an issue paying rent and a mental health crisis while they were trying to deliver on their Kickstarter - I don't think they've been active online since, further isolating them from their community and support network). Would law enforcement help that situation? Absolutely not, even if the money was recovered it probably wouldn't be worth it.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  I mean no offense to those having a mental health crisis, it happens (I have had one myself), but that also doesn't mean a non profit should have its funds walked off with (regardless of why). I've reported non profits to the IRS in the US when it appeared they might not be entirely above board, and I never felt like I was "calling the cops" in the same way I would where they're going to break down someone's front door; it's asking people who are tasked with oversight to do their job. Unequivocally, I hope this person gets whatever help they need if they need help, regardless of the outcome of this non profit.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    I understand you didn't feel that way, but I think maybe you should do a thought experiment of what "doing their job" would mean? Once those events are set in motion, you can't control how they unfold or predict the outcome; even if that person didn't do the thing you were worried about, law enforcement may well find some reason to antagonize or imprison them. I'd encourage people not to contact any law enforcement entity of any kind if they don't have a really solid understanding of the situation. Consider this story from a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33626670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33626670 where someone called the cops because they were concerned that they saw a child walking alone, and the mother ended up going to jail. That wasn't the intention of the person who called the police; but once you invite law enforcement into someone else's life, you have no idea what they will do and you have no power to recall them. 'pessimizer relayed a similar experience yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33836312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33836312 I honestly encourage everyone to consider whether letting it go is the best thing to do in any given situation. Someone might've stolen money? Contacting law enforcement probably won't get it back. An organization is dissolved? We can form it again, with a structure that ensures a higher bus number. These are things we can control, and where we can predict the outcome.
    - imperfect_blue 4y ago
      The purpose of reporting crime is not to receive compensation; it's to create a norm where crime is punished and hence deterred. It's a societal benefit not a personal one. It's not good that miscarriages of justice do happen, but that doesn't change the overall point.
      - danielheath 4y ago
        Given that miscarriages of justice happen, maybe calling the cops speculatively is not a great plan?
      - maxbond 4y ago
        I understand the principle of what you're advocating for, but the unfortunate reality is that miscarriages of justice are the norm and not the exception. I'd put forward another principle; it is better to let 1000 guilty parties go free than to condemn 1 innocent party (and "innocent" here should be taken to include people who are committing a "crime" that is normally tolerated, employed as an excuse to arrest someone - each of us commits dozens of these "crimes" regularly, without realizing it). When we reflexively invite law enforcement into other people's lives, when we do not and cannot understand the situation at hand, we are not likely to promote a societal good. We are far more likely to promote a societal ill; that of overpolicing. I'd encourage people to think of law enforcement as an adversarial entity, constantly trying to do everyone in, who needs your invitation to act. It might be because they need to drive their performance metrics up, it might be because they're overzealous in the pursuit of what they view as justice, we can't really know and it doesn't matter. When you give them that invitation, they will make the absolute most of the opportunity. If you invite that monster into someone else's life - you had better be damn sure that they are a real threat to the community. You don't want to ruin (or perhaps end) someone's life over a miscommunication.
- TheBrokenRail 4y ago
  Having a mental health crisis should not mean that you're free of consequences. It's not like random people are driving up to their house to harass them, they're reporting them to a regulatory body who will investigate themselves and prosecute if needed. And if they are having a mental health crisis, they should be able to plea insanity. All is this is compounded by the fact that, at least according to another commenter, they're head of operations at another company. If someone in control of a lot of money with duties to other just vanishes (and according to other commenters, they do have legal duties in the UK), they should face consequences. People didn't donate to Fosshost so one person can disappear and take their money with them.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    > It's not like random people are driving up to their house to harass them When you direct law enforcement to investigate someone, you should anticipate this as a strong possibility. > And if they are having a mental health crisis, they should be able to plea insanity. I think the bar for this is much higher than having a mental health crisis, and that even if successful it won't result in you maintaining your liberty but being institutionalized instead of imprisoned. But IANAL and certainly not a UK lawyer (barrister? solicitor?). > [T]hey should face consequences. Personally I don't buy the notion of retributive justice. It seems like the volunteers of Fosshost are taking lessons from all of this, and creating a new project with better governance. I think that's a productive and healthy response, and the place where effort should be focused. To me, creating a new, better project to continue the mission, that's what justice is. That's what people donated their money to do, too; to support the mission. Personally, I plan to donate to their new project. I'm not in a position to contact authorities (as I had no involvement in their last project), but I wouldn't if I could. Everyone makes up their own mind about these things, but I hope anyone considering contacting law enforcement really weighs the potential for harm and what exactly the likelihood of a good outcome is (and what that even means) before acting.
    - phendrenad2 4y ago
      Well, your sentiment is nice and all, but you're effectively dooming every nonprofit to spectacular dissolution if their CEO decides to not answer the phone. Non-profits, you know, those things that are supposed to serve the public good? But I guess public good is on hold if the CEO goes AWOL.
- nibbleshifter 4y ago
  Healthcare in the UK is free.
  - xnorswap 4y ago
    I love the NHS and have written previously in defence of it but mental healthcare is practically non-existent with extremely long waiting lists and you really need to know what you're expecting to get from it to get anything at all from it. Unlike physical health, it does not work to help those who really need it.
    - DanBC 4y ago
      So, uh, yes, but it's very dependent what bit of England you're in and what bit of mental health service you're trying to access. I'm not disagreeing with you btw, the picture is pretty bleak for very many people. Some of the data is here. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/mental-health-services-monthly-statistics https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/sta... And the IAPT data is here (although in many places IAPT has been diluted so much it's not giving much meaningful benefit) https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/psychological-therapies-report-on-the-use-of-iapt-services https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/sta...
remram 4y ago
Anyone who donated could probably file a complaint. They accepted donations from individuals in the name of the CIC: http://web.archive.org/web/20221123174539/https://fosshost.org/donate http://web.archive.org/web/20221123174539/https://fosshost.o...