Hi,
Thank you for the answer, but I'm not entirely satisfied with it, so please lets continue discussing in a hope that this text will help others as well.

It is not the price that triggered this text of mine, but the threads on this subreddit where the team addresses their transparency problem and gives very few info about token distribution. You would expect a lot more info about tokens when they are talking about transparency, so this sounded fishy to me. Then, when I saw them selling from "founders" and "community" wallets in this early stage of the project and knowing they already have 50 000 Ethereum on their hands for the expenses of a small team made of 15 people this info triggered another concern in my head and this is when I started writing the article.

First of all you're talking about 50 000 ETH being worth 16 million $ in the time of sale, but nowdays, that's more than 35 million $ which is not a small amount of money for the company made out of 15 employees, just to get things straight.

The "community" wallet is not just for the community in the context most of us think. An "ecosystem" wallet is probably a better way to describe it, and this may have been a language barrier from the original translation. While some of those tokens have/will be used for the community specifically (e.g. bounties), payments for things like exchange listings and third party advertising also come from this wallet.

Well, to be honest, language barrier should not exist with company worth more than 50 million $, do you agree? So, the community fund is no longer a "Community fund" but a "Ccosystem fund", at least we got that straight.

The founding team wallet does enter circulation slowly over time, but the team has confirmed that they have not actually sold off any of these tokens.

If the tokens didn't enter the circulating supply by sale, how exactly did they enter the market? Are there any reports to back this claims up? We're talking about little less than 7 million ITC tokens which were worth almost 60 million dollars at one point, and I don't even know if any Ethereum tokens were sold as well?

The private sale was executed with large and reputable venture capital groups like FBG and #Hashed. If the author does not believe the private sale even happened, then they are also accusing these big VCs for being in on a scam as well. #Hashed has IoT Chain listed directly on their website. This is public information that anyone can look up.

Thanks for clarifying this topic, I'm happy with this answer.

The author is quick to make a statement here that event cryptocurrency startups need to be "decentralized" themselves which I totally disagree with. The author needs to wrap their head around that while blockchain technology can help decentralize control of data, blockchain companies themselves can still exist in the traditional sense. As I mentioned earlier, community is probably the wrong word to describe that wallet. Those funds belong in control of the founding team where they can decide how to best spend them to support the ITC project and ecosystem. I would much prefer the remain in control of those funds rather than give control to a community who's motives are largely focused on how to inflate the price of the token as quickly as possible.

Well, maybe language barrier is a problem in this case since "Community fund" should be a Community fund, and the text provided by ITC team on all media so far was misleading and nontransparent from the beginning of ITC project which is not good.

I strongly disagree that it's better that the funds are held by one or few persons other than the ITC community, this sounds bad and unpromising to me since the community would only be able to handle those tokens by the set of rules set for DAO, while if the individual holds the funds his child can get sick tomorrow (God forbid) and then the whole project is in custody of this individual emotions.

Some of the results of that 3.1M spent are the exchange listings and bounty campaigns which are measurable outcomes.

You do realize that at some point those 3.1 million tokens spent from "Community/Ecosystem fund" and 3.75 million tokens from the "Founders" wallet where worth more than 55 million USD right? Now show me bounties and exchange listings that are worth that much money?! This answer of yours is again nontransparent and concerning.

As a community, we're entitled to ask that question but the team is also not obligated to tell us exactly how they spend what is essentially their own personal funds. The word "dump" is a little dramatic. Those tokens entered circulation but as mentioned earlier, the team has not sold them off. They anticipate a significant rise in value at which point in the future, they are perfectly allowed to sell some of these to profit from their efforts in starting this business. This is their full time job, their passion. Shouldn't they be allowed to reap the benefits from this at some point in the future?

Team is not obligated to answer anything this is correct, but this will also reflect on the price of ITC tokens, I can assure you that.

No. The company itself is a private entity but they are working to build a decentralized network for IoT. The ITC is and always will be the owner of the project.

What do you mean by "ITC is and always will be the owner of the project"? We, token buyers gave them our trust to build an OPEN SOURCE, DECENTRALIZED project. By open source it means they don't own it, any ANYONE can use the code at their will. Seems to me like you lack basic knowledge about decentralization and open source.

If you cannot do that, then I suggest exiting your position until such a time that you can.

You're advising me to sell now after you guys dumped almost 7 million tokens and the price collapsed 9 times in value?!

In the end, you just confirmed that 1 OR FEW INDIVIDUALS ARE HOLDING MORE THAN 50% OF THE TOKENS WITHOUT ANY SMART CONTRACTS or MULTI SIGNATURES TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS MONEY IS NOT DUMPED AT WILL. Who doesn't find this FISHY is not the brightest person in my opinion.

Other than that you haven't provided any sources or transparency reports. I hope you will in the next post.

Regards