Hmm - so I’d suspect that ASIC would most likely only get involved if a complaint came directly from a TAW Holder (essentially a share holders).
Between her emails and social media posts, Annie’s left a lot of information out there that, with no caveats, TAW holders will receive 50% of TAW collective profits, and that monthly meetings for TAW Holders/ shareholders will be via zoom, via a link available on special part of the discord that only TAW holders can access.
someone who is a TAW holder that Annie has blocked from the discord would be entitled to lodge a complaint based on inability to access the zoom link.
She also consistently said TAW holder, so someone who holds a number of TAWs, that can’t access the discord, could transfer or sell, at a very low price, those TAW NFTs. They are then TAW holders and by Annie’s own words, have access to both profits and the discord and the shareholder meetings. if she tries to block them from the discord, so stop them from attending, that’s another cause for a complaint to ASIC.
Anyone at those meetings, that then raises questions that are left unanswered, or who are shouted down by the mob, would also have a substantive complaint to take to ASIC.
And the way that she has set this whole NFT thing up, means it all anonymous - and with so much on the Social Media Record - she can’t now change things, because that will also result in the ability for any holder to report and complain to ASIC
(written without chatGPT but perhaps I should have used it!)