Bitcoin Forum

Doesn't anyone else smell a rat when they view the bitcoin foundation board members?

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board
Mark Karpeles -> Owner Mtgox
Charlie Shrem -> Owner Bitinstant
Peter Vessenes -> Owner Coinlab

So they are collecting donations for the betterment bitcoin?  Seems to me like they are collect donations to fund their own interests?

While at the same time all these guys have their companies listed as Platinum/Silver members?  But don't list any financials of how much they donated, or where the donations are specially being spent.

Don't get me wrong I have nothing against these people; they are running great and useful businesses.  And I wish them all success in their business ventures.

But seriously wtf are people donating coins to this foundation?

It like Benanke, Dimon and Madoff setting up a "Dollar Foundation" and people donating to it to help improve the image of the dollar.

The same Mark Karpeles that is holding all of bitcoinica's creditors BTC hostage for the past 10 months?

I for one welcome our new corporatist overlords!

Don't be silly. These are the people that are making your Bitcoins worth something.

So your contention is that without these 3 companies bitcoin would be worthless?

It reeks. This is basically a self-serving enterprise of business owners that will look to shut out competition or anybody that doesn't walk their line using their own list of agendas. I've seen it before. Power corrupts. Let them have their gatherings, but don't donate to it, and take your business elsewhere.

define "the betterment of bitcoin"

No. My contention is that these guys made you money. Without them, you would have less.

Don't forget, the main goal of the foundation is to pay the devs. The Foundation has no authority. It's basically setup to take handouts and give them to clever people who otherwise could not afford to quit their jobs to work on Bitcoin.

I doubt any of us realize how many nights, weekends, and vacations have been spent on making the protocol actually work. For free. That's why there is a foundation.

And which devs have been paid?  How much were they paid?  When where they paid?  Who decided how much they were paid?

It seems to me like most of the devs are actually donating members, so money flowing in the exact opposite direction that you claim:
https://bitcoinfoundation.org/members

This comment made me think of plantation owners telling their slaves at least we give you food.

If you are likening yourself to a slave, what work were you forced to do?

Totally agree.

Do you think that if any one comes along with an idea that is good for bitcoin, but bad for these companies will get promoted by the foundation?

For example a the Bitcoin ATM which utilized Bitstamp exchange; I wonder how the foundation would look upon that; a pretty dim view i would guess.

i'm more thinking conflict of interest between mtgox and ripple
although i STILL have no idea what ripples are

My point was not of being a slave as I do not believe that just yet. It just appears to me the "foundation" has branded itself as the authority and the primary channel for Bitcoin support, the figure heads of Bitcoin even. Perhaps the foundation should start manufacturing physical coins with the "representatives" faces on the coin to remind us who makes our money worth anything.

Just launch the "Bitcoin consortium" then.
Distribute flyers with your picture on it, describing what you've accomplished for Bitcoin.

Oh wait...

So are you saying:

1) There should not be a Bitcoin Foundation or some other advocacy group for bitcoin.

or

2) There should be a Foundation, but it should be run by people who have absolutely no interest in bitcoin to avoid a conflict of interest.

?

How about:

3) Have the foundation run by people interested in bitcoin, but not involved in running Bitcoin Exchange related businesses.  Certainly the people on the board should not be promoting their own businesses as "Platinum Members", where they pay the membership fee to themselves and then choose how they allocate that member fee (if said fee was even paid at all)

or

4) Run it as it is now but with transparency.  Making all accounting public (donations, expenses, etc..)