Bitcoin Forum

In the last month or two there have been a few allegations going around of a pro-BFL bias in the moderating activities of the forum. I don't personally have a strong opinion one way or the other, but I do think that there is certainly some basis for these claims.

The Bitcoin community is still a reasonably small one. This means two things:

Firstly, the moderation team of this forum holds an incredibly powerful position. This is the main and original Bitcoin forum and the only one with a significant amount of activity. It's also worth noting that Theymos, the chief administrator of this forum, is also the chief administrator of the Bitcoin reddit, the only other Bitcoin forum with any reasonably amount of activity.

Secondly, it's not unfeasible that members of the moderation team would have a financial interest in various Bitcoin businesses. It's a small community, moderators tend to be reasonably prominent members of that community, and we're all entrepreneurial souls. This could lead to conflict of interest.

In the United Kingdom, members of parliament need to submit information to a "register of member's interests." This is a public, written record of the business interest of members of parliament. It records all of the companies they work for, have received gifts from, or have invested in. This helps prevent unfair practices under the table.

I propose a similar system for moderators of this forum. They should publicly reveal their Bitcoin business interests. This would help identify bias, as well as fend off false allegations of bias.

If moderators don't feel comfortable revealing which Bitcoin businesses they have a financial interest in succeeding, then they should reassess their suitability to be moderators.

Is this referring to the mad ravings of Micon? The guy who called Josh a mentally disabled pedophile? That's less "biased" and more "justice."

You're talking about this forum right?  Bitcointalk?  The one you pay absolutely nothing to use and for which the mods are paid in pure 24K criticism?  Please, feel free to offer an alternative that everyone flocks to in droves.  And your proposal would carry more weight if you offered specific examples. I actually had a mod on my Ignore list for some time because I perceived he was severely biased in favor of a BFL competitor. It's all a matter of perspective.

Actually just an aside (I don't even know what this thread is about) theymos clears 2 grand a week just on the advertising slots he sells...

No, this is a wider issue.


Wouldn't you feel more comfortable knowing whether or not the mod is biased because of some financial interest?

You must be joking, have you seen the garbage mods have to deal with already? The last thing I'm gonna do on this forum is share my financial information publicly. For the most part, the mods are good people who care about bitcoin and the community. In return for them donating their free time to help the forum, the very least they deserve is the same privacy everyone else gets.

This.  Maybe if mods got paid to do what they do, but as volunteers it doesn't make sense.

Certainly.  I'm saying we have no standing to make such a request.

I have invested in Bitcoins and Litecoins. Let it be on the record!

This.

However, I can 'reveal' that I'm invested in Bitcoins and wish to see its success, and I have absolutely no ties/vested interest/investments in either ASIC company (including ASICMINER, BFL, and Avalon).

He clears it, and then it goes into the forums reserves, not into his pocket.

The mods dont get paid so its beside the point.

Naw I don't think the mods need to bother with that.  Unless they go rogue and start editing posts maliciously (which, if that happens, they wouldn't stay mods for long), I couldn't care less what the mods are up to.

Also, keep up the great work mods :D

I think many people would be willing to deal with the chore of moderation in exchange for the opportunity to clandestinely push the agenda of businesses they are invested in by belittling or suppressing criticism. Not that I am suggesting that you, or anyone else is doing that, but if one of you did choose to then it would have a great effect due to how focused the Bitcoin community is on this one single forum.

I personally think that neutrality is an important quality for forum moderation generally, but it is especially important in this situation.


There should be greater transparency about this as well. Due to the rising Bitcoin price the forum probably has $1m or more in reserve. This is supposed to be used to create new forum software but there has been no movement on this. Theymos is, after all, just a young kid in college. There's no way he should be entrusted with that kind of money without any transparency. For all we know he's blown it on prostitutes, or it's paying for his own personal expenses. Of course there's no reason to think that he would, but why risk it all on some anonymous 20 year old kid? There should be more accountability.

^^^

I was a mod for a long time, very few people actually appreciate what mods do.

Very few people KNOW, because if you do your job well, it is mostly invisible.

Ah yes, bitcointalk must strive to be as similar to the British parliament as humanly possible. It is such a great paragon of transparency and justice that us mere mortals can only aspire to.

Oh for fucks sake don't - Sincerely, British Citizen who has been born here and lived here since 1990

It reminds me of Americans who have this stereotypical view about the British and how we all speak in posh accents and everythings in Victorian times and we're really polite, you are going to have your entire world come crashing down if you ever actually visit here lol.

I think what's more important is no conflict of interest - ie don't moderate a controversial XYZ thread if you own 10% of XYZ. Pretty obvious and I hope this is being adhered to.

Turn on your sarcasm detector.

If you want I can show you a pic of my sexual organ.
Financial interests I only reveal to my accountant. It's none of your business.

Well, I'm seeing that you guys aren't really interested in transparency and accountability.

It makes no difference to me, I know that I won't be taken in by scams and poor products even if the moderators are pushing them and suppressing criticism.


Psy, it's ironic that you would come in here and criticise this idea, since it is actually designed to protect gullible people like yourself. How much did you lose to Pirate again?

Ah, he kept 1500 BTC from me, it doesn't mean I lost them. Chump change. I'm still here and not in poverty. Could you say the same if it happened to you?

I don't want your protection and never asked for it. And the word is greedy, not gullible.
You don't know the spirit in which I deposited the coins with pirate, so, don't speculate...

Posting for the sake of Americans as well who have no idea about us :P

Yes I could. I currently hold a good bit more coins than that, and my risk management policy is to only keep money in coins that I can comfortably afford to lose. I've lost more than $63,000 in high risk ventures before. I wouldn't call it "chump change" because I have more respect for money than that, but losses like that are manageable in relation to my current financial situation. I suspect your "chump change" rhetoric is nothing more than bravado anyway.

The difference is, of course, that I lost nothing with Pirate.  I would never put money into a ponzi scheme. I suspect that I'm at least as greedy as you, but nowhere near as stupid.

Like I said
1- You don't know why I put the money there
2- You don't know how much I put in there
3- You don't know how much I withdrawn
4- You don't even know if I lost a single satoshi with it
5- You don't know me, how I live, where I live, what I do for a living or how much I earn

And yet, here you are jumping into conclusions with no data whatsoever to base them on and I'm the stupid?
I'm see more stupidity in your statements than on my failed "investment".

There is no clever reason to do so.


Any amount is too much.


Even if you withdrew money, it doesn't make it a wise decision.


Even if you were fortunate enough to gain money, it would still have been a stupid risk.


I have a few £50 notes in my wallet now. I could take them out, set them on fire, and I'd never feel the difference or miss the money. It would still be a completely stupid thing to do, would it not?

I can't say a decision is stupid when I have no data whatsoever on why the decision was made, and you shouldn't also.
I don't know why you are burning the bills, so maybe it isn't stupid after all.
Things aren't as black and white as you want them to be.