Bitcoin Forum

I would like to propose creating a bitcoin user's group, which will be incorpoated in the US as a non-profit foundation, with a board and members.

The bitcoin user group will promote the common interest (bitcoin) as expressed by the members resolutions, discussions and votes.

To that end I propose the Open Bitcoin User Group be formed as follows:

- A nominal membership fee of 0.01 BTC or $1 USD, whichever is less. It should be open to a very broad user group.
Fees, donations and expenditures are managed openly and audited once yearly by independent audit.

- An elected board of directors who are responsible ONLY for fiduciary control, and do not represent the will of the community. Membership funds are used for maintenance and operations only. Donated funds are controlled by member votes.
- A direct representation system that allows any member to propose resolutions, in a way that all members can see them
- Upon achieving a certain percentage of membership approval (1% or 0.1%, something feasible), the proposal is put to a member-wide vote.
- All vote results are recorded publicly. They will represent the "will of the open bitcoin user group".
- No one gets veto, no one is excluded
- One member, one vote. No one is asked "what did you do for bitcoin lately".
- Board members DO NOT GET TO VOTE on member proposals. If you have de-facto power, you don't get to vote.

No bosses, no petty tyrants. Representative boards are a relic of scarce-communications. Direct democracy is both feasible and efficient, on a mass scale.

Please do not bash. This is not a move "against" any person or organization. There is clearly a deficiency in the current systems of representation and communication for the community.

Offer help, ideas, support, etc. All are welcome.

I would love more diversity in the Bitcoin world. I fully support your efforts and I'll make a longest post tomorrow with some suggestions.

Exactly what sort of 'power' would such a group have?
It speaks for bitcoin? Bitcoin is a thing, I don't think it has opinions that need to be spoken.

Direct democracy still equals 3 wolves and a sheep deciding whats for diner.

How many votes can I buy for 100 BTC? (either bribes or multiple accounts, take your pick)

It has the power to distributed funds from donations, and to express the votes of the members. No more power than that.

You only get one vote, one person. Who would you bribe? The board doesn't vote.

Well 1 vote per person - how do you enforce that?
What keeps me from creating sock puppets?
Why would I donate to something with no clue how my money might get used?

Because I suggest a process to decide all funding decisions openly and with votes from all members.

I'm open to suggestions on how to avoid sockpuppets. The obvious solution would be members have to tie to identities, at least once for verification. We can discard the records once verified. We can use an independent company to do the identity verification without giving us details. We can even outsource the membership management and vote management to an independent third party.

I am proposing a 501(c)(3) or equivalent, with US registration, named directors and open accounts. Add to that independent yearly audits of the books.

I'm open to more and better approached to develop transparency and accountability.

PS. I am recusing myself from the board. I will pay by 1 bitcoin (or less) and get voting membership. Then we can all elect a board we trust, though they will not be able to spend the money without a member vote.

In the US it is relatively simple to create a trust account under an independent executor, who follows rules set out in the bylaws.

This sounds like a good idea even if bitcoin.org weren't having transparency issues.

It could be said that this is a 'fork' of one of the management groups.

Diversity is important and hopefully, ultimately, a plurality of organisations will serve the community better than one.

Can someone suggest a trusted member of this community who can act as escrow for user membership fees until we reach a 100 launch size?

The policy would be to hold all the funds until we reach 100 members, then hand control to the board under control of the bylaws of a 501(c)(3) or to an independent trustee running a trust account.

If in 90 days we cannot get 100 members, all of the existing fees are returned to the same bitcoin address they originated (or a refund address offered at signup), minus tx fees.

I want the money to be separate and publicly accounted from the beginning and certainly not under my control.

Suggestions? I've seen some postings by a guy called John K(?) who does escrow, perhaps he might be trusted enough?

I'll fund any escrow and maintenance costs from my own pocket until it's up and running

Interesting. As soon as you have money and voting, you have laws which apply. For instance you are referring to US law, and I don't believe in US law to say the least. (I think the US is becoming a lawless country in many ways). Why should BTC be US-based? Laws without enforcement / courts don't have much meaning. If there is something wrong with BTC, another currency / protocol will emerge. For instance Ripple is created by an organization and we will see how that works out.

That's a big donation. The Bitcoin foundation fee is considerably less.

Please suggest alternative venues for incorporation.

Perhaps a country that is both neutral and has stronger non-profit and privacy laws?

Somewhere in Scandinavia? New Zealand? Australia?

I'm open to all suggestions - Please don't tell me what is wrong, I'm sure I got a lot wrong on my first draft!

 Tell me how to do it RIGHT in your opinion.

There's no reason for me to set the rules. That goes against the whole point of this.

Help me crowdsource the rules for a broad-based representative association that can promote the common interest (bitcoin) via the expression of the members through resolutions, discussions and voting.

Thank you!

Hmm... I didn't have a problem with the size of donation to begin with but now that you mention it, it could be very exclusionary to a large population of the community.

I just checked and you are right. I miscalculated.

How is $1 per year (0.01 BTC)?

Reasonable?

Let's say $1 per member per year.  No lifetime membership - have to pay each year to keep current. Oh, obviously there are no corporate memberships. People only.

This could be a problem as far as financing the setup of the group is concerned? You'd need thousands of users to join in order to have the funds to incorporate in a foreign country?

I have a strong reluctance to donate to organizations to "represent me". It's too open-ended. I'd much rather donate to specific goals, and what's missing right now is someone to organize and coordinate crowdfunding efforts.

why in the US? Wouldn't it be better to diversify?

I think you need some structure in place in order to achieve the secondary goals you're talking about. Already you recognise that you need an organisation to coordinate crowd-funding efforts. This could be a duty of the Bitcoin organisation.

Probably because OP is from the US and most familiar with the US legal system.

He's happy to accept alternative suggestions though.

Just familiar with 501(c)(3) non-profit laws in the US.

I'd love to hear alternatives, especially if they offer better protections for non-profits, better privacy laws etc.

Perhaps New Zealand? Australia? Sweden? Germany?

Switzerland? Openly declared neutral country, with strict bank secrecy laws. Obviously, we won't store funds as fiat. But the org itself. Or, check out the pirate bay. Where is it? Sweden?

The problem with alternatives is you then have to spend a lot of time and effort looking up details in those jurisdictions.

At least in the US you're familiar with those laws and better understand the nuances.

For a non-profit organisation local laws should have far less of an impact.

It's not like you'll be issuing shares or protecting IP.

I don't think funding is the problem. If it is well structured, then "thousands" is entirely possible. Anyway, I'm sure there will be donations separate from the members fees. I've never had trouble raising money. That is not a big problem for this community.

Accountability... now that's a problem. Getting people to spend on a worthy cause and a representative transparent organization? Not so much.

I'll donate the first $1000 the moment we hit 100 members, that's a pledge.

The Pirate Bay were also prosecuted and convicted. Not sure if you knew that.

Thousands of users eventually but initially it might take a year before you have enough members to incorporate. I'm just thinking that not being setup might discourage users from participating (i.e. those that will wait till everything's set up).

2 methods

1. auto block tor/proxy IP's to stop clones making a ridiculous amount of names. but dont record or log IP's just compare them at registration and block known tor/proxy addresses.
2. why need someone whole life story. a simple webcam/picture of the user holding up their username on a piece of paper should suffice.

but more important then members fee's what benefits/services/powers will this organisation have/give. and what salary will you earn from the fee's

Alright this is my two cents and it's a little long:

Issue #1 Unique Voter ID
======================
Solution

Establish an independent entity that both processes annual member fees and collects three pieces of information from members:

• Full Name
• Government Issued ID Number
• Date of Birth

After a member has paid, she will be issued a member ID number. Take it alongside these three pieces of info and produce a unique hash for a member. The new org will receive a copy of the hash, but not the member data. Members will then create a password and can log into the new org's website with the hash and password (two factor authentication). To make the process easier, we could also allow the user to alias the hash after the first time login. Hence we have preserved anonymity while ensuring everyone only gets one vote.

Issue #2 Funding and Transparency
===========================

The independent entity shall fund on a quarterly basis the new org via Bitcoins only. The new org shall submit to an independent audit every two years and must disclose its donors and industry associations. Members have a right to request at any time, communications, minutes, meetings schedules, and lobbying efforts.

The new org shall be permitted to pursue industry donation; however, must issue a notice that it has accepted money if it is at least 10% of the quarterly funding from the independent entity

Issue #3 IP and Branding
===========================

All materials and projects the new org shall develop must be released under a creative commons license. The brands, copyrights, patents, and other IP obtained by new org shall be either open sourced or transferred to the independent entity with explicit instructions on how and when to pursue legal protection of said IP.

Issue #4 Crowdfunding and Community Engagement
======================================

The new org shall create a crowdfunding website (project bitstarter- kickstarter for bitcoin) to allow the community to vote with their bitcoins towards worthy projects. The profits generated from operating bitstarter will be invested into the developer's fund

Issue #5 Developer funding
======================================

Having a single paid developer for Bitcoin is a major point of failure regardless of the integrity of said developer and those who pay him. Therefore, the new org shall establish an independent branch dedicated to developing bitcoin software and working on the core bitcoin software. This branch will not solicit donations from any entity. All funding shall come from two sources:
(1) A bitcoin mining pool (or donations from pool operators)
(2) The new org

The developer branch shall also solicit corporate entities such as facebook, amazon and others to assign employees to work either part or full time on its projects.

Issue #6 Bitcoin Education
=====================================

In an effort to make Bitcoins more accessible, the new org shall embrace the Bitcoin Education Project and its goal of releasing crowdsourced, free online content to promote mainstream acceptance and use of bitcoin.

Issue #7 Media Relations
=====================================

The new org shall not endorse any viewpoint or ideology in relation to Bitcoin. Instead the new org will create a media center and allow the community to nominate (with the permission of the individual) preferred contacts. The community shall decide who they wish to speak on their behalf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's all for now folks     

Let me clarify this last part because it is very important

1) The association will do bitcoin advocacy and media to promote bitcoin. Whether there are member services will have to be decided by members.

2) No one will earn a salary. Board members will be volunteers.

3) I will especially NOT earn anything from this. I will in fact donate at personal cost without any return other than membership as a plain (no other kind) member. I will not be on the board because I have stated that I will neither seek, nor accept nominations and will decline any position in the association. No salaries. If a person can't volunteer for free for this work of caretaker for the board, then they are not the right candidate anyway. This is not a personal enrichment machine.

The only thing I can imagine as a "benefit" would be to call myself the first member to join, which will be entirely symbolic and carry no power.

Quick update:

Have a reddit discussion going on here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1dbpqf/proposal_an_open_bitcoin_user_group_that_is_open/

Please upvote and comment so we can get lots of input and diverse perspectives!


I have setup a placeholder website here: bitcoinusergroup.org

No, the "webmaster" doesn't get to set policy. I just dumped some ideas in there, but they I don't have veto and we can change everything if that makes the user group more broad and effective.

Please keep sending suggestions - this will be everyone's organization, not mine.

We need to create a blog or a website to help develop this idea further. I think there is great potential, but trolls and cynics are going to try to derail this one pretty quickly

Why would I give money to an organization where the majority can vote against me, instead of just donating it to something specific I personally support?

Because the rules are defined and the system is fair for everyone. They don't change at the whim and will of some cabal that might agree with you for the day.

You can donate it to an organization which claims to support your goals and then decides how to spend it without any vote whatsoever. I don't see how that is better. Or you can just donate to very very niche things and dilute your voice.

I think there's room in between for a organization that listens to members.

referring to emboldened text: as long as the members are not part of a special breed of elite secret society that requires a large fee and a secret handshake to become a member. other wise the COMMUNITY's voice is again ignored (EG bitcoinfoundation)

forming a membership platform may weed out cloned accounts but it is always going to have a limited voice compared to the millions of users

Interesting.

The technical issues will keep emerging as Bitcoin grows and evolves, and these issues will be global, nation-blind. The best way to address them is to concentrate resources in one entity, such as Bitcoin Foundation or any similar group. This ensures we don't waste resources by multiplying efforts.

On the other hand, we have regulatory issues and educational efforts, which are very country-specific due to different legal systems, culture, and political sentiment. It would be silly to attempt to help Bitcoin in these areas with one-size-fits-all solutions from a single, global entity. What is needed are regional groups that coordinate when appropriate. What OP proposes might work best at this level. Based on IPs of nodes, and number of Internet users per country, we can see that highest levels of adoption are seen in Scandinavia, so these countries may be a good testing ground.

I therefore propose that we keep discussing best ways to organize, but then organize - and incorporate - locally in each region. These groups could then communicate and coordinate as needed. I am currently in Canada, and would most likely join local group with the formalized membership and voting procedures.

Agreed. One of the proposals is to have a membership fee of $1 per year. Another is to have no fees, just a requirement that members vote at least twice a year (ie participate).

Another proposal is to allow members to join, but only if sponsored by two existing members, or require some verification. That creates a simple choice - if you're new to the community, you may need to prove you are a human (a photo with your face,  the username and date on a piece of paper would be sufficient), to avoid sock-puppets. Otherwise, you can just have two existing members invite you, no need to prove or provide identity.

I'm open to any and all suggestions that will make this as broad as possible, while still having a defined membership that everyone can trust is made of real humans. Any approach that gets us to this goal, with the minimum cost for members and the minimum barrier to entry is more than welcome.

Great suggestion on local chapters. I'd like to roll it all up into a global group, but localizing power is always better.

Disagree on not duplicating Foundation. They have vastly different goals and principles from this proposal. While this is not a "bash foundation" proposal, I think it is valuable to look at some of the areas where they are not responsive and fix those as "features" of an alternative organization

The same is true for you, you or the board might do what you claim or not, voting doesn't change anything in this regard.

If I want to dilute my voice, then I join an organization like yours where there is a majority vote; if I don't want to do that, I just support
those groups that are very close to my goals and have a good reputation. And they don't have to be niche at all.

I'm not entirely against majority voting in a voluntary association, but in this case I don't see any benefit to it. Maybe if you come up with
specific plans and goals, I might.

@aantonop:  i just wanted to say thank you for your efforts.  altho your exuberance can show no bounds, none of the principles or requests that i've read coming from you has been outrageous or unreasonable.  

keep up the good work.

That doesn't verify anything. Once I have control over two accounts (e.g. mine and my friend's; or mine and mine because I had the skill to find some photo of a human in that thing called internet), I can start inviting myself over and over again to sign up thousand times.

Please propose solutions... We already know that this is hard and doesn't have easy solutions.

The organizing and controlling is already happening just without any of your input. You can pretend it isn't or that those organizations don't have power, or that they actually listen to or care about your opinion. You'd be wrong.

I am however interested in your opinion and proposals for building a good representative association. I tried to work within the existing systems first. Now I'm trying to do something else instead. I don't want you to trust me, or any individual. I want people to trust in a certain process that is transparent. I don't trust most people with power, that's why I prefer to trust well formed organizations, with good process and transparency.

This is not a choice between do something and do-nothing. Something is already being done in terms of "representing" the users, and it has credibility whether you like it or not. What it lacks is transparency or any authority.

If you don't believe in any form of organization, that's fine. This certainly wouldn't appeal to you. However, if you do believe in some form of organization, just not this one, please tell me how to improve this in a way that would make it more trustworthy for you.

Australia probably wouldn't work as an alternative to the US.  You'd run into problems with the structure you're proposing because you'd need independent oversight of the voting process. 

You'd effectively be creating a General Meeting or Special Resolution situation (which invokes quorum requirements) every time you put something to a membership vote and that would be a complete pain in the ass because you'd need to involve either a third party auditing firm - which costs money - or the Electoral Office (this is who generally oversees the voting process at Annual General Meetings/Special General Meetings of NFP organisations). 

Verifying ID could get messy too.  Third party ID services aren't free and either the organisation requiring verification needs to pay for the service (the usual case) or the aspiring member does.

how about you start a thread that asks people what they want. obviously you want some proper spokespeople for bitcoin that have a varied opinion compared to the elite elected members of bitcoinfoundation.

so instead of starting a whole new organisation purely to get members to vote for an elite elected few spokes people. how about just ask anyone and everyone if they want to become spokes people. to show off their skills and then paste their info in the media section of this forum or even request a totally new "topc" to be made on this forum. then the whole population of this forum can see the variety themselves and grab names/videos, statements that take their fancy. and use those contacts within their own projects/ local contacts with media/own websites.

Franky,

The press center debacle is just a symptom, not the problem I am trying to solve. The bigger problem is a complete lack of accountability in the organizations that either claim or are widely seen as representing bitcoin. The press center debacle is only the latest example of that lack of accountability turning into tone-deaf decisions.

We fix the press center, and next week it is problems with the conference. Then what? We fix the conference, then it is problems with who talks to regulators (or if they should talk to regulators) and cuts "deals" for bitcoin. The week after that, one of these tone-deaf non-representatives ends up tstifying in front of Congress "on behalf of bitcoin". It will keep going on, and while some will say that this is not a problem or that they don't really represent anyone, that's not realistic.

That's why I felt the need to launch a user organization that is inclusive, transparent and much more representative. Patching the symptoms is not enough. This proposal strikes at the root of the problem - a handful of unaccountable organizations and their offshoots claiming to represent us.

For the record, we agree on BF. I just brought them up as an example - granted, not a good one, but the only one. There is definitely plenty of room for people willing to work on addressing issues which are not likely to get attention from the current BF leadership. I also don't see any fundamental reasons for conflict, such as mutually exclusive goals. It's simply a matter of operating in different areas of the Bitcoin ecosystem. Ultimately, everyone involved wants transactions to keep getting verified and secured, and the advantages over other payment systems maintaned and strengthened.

this is where you are meandering in the wrong direction.
bitcoin does not need representation, such as a CEO, leader. bitcoin needs lecturers and teachers to spread the message.

i dont want management of bitcoin, i want tutors to explain bitcoin to the layman.

representatives as you say are people that say i am the head of the bitcoin community. i wield power.

spokes people as i say are people that know what they are talking about and can help others understand.

if i want someone to speak out in congress or in parliament. then i would search ouut someone in parliament that atleast understands peoples freedoms and knows of bitcoin and has a open mind and get them to be a spokesmen.. not elect them as the leader of bitcoin incorporated.

as for the offshoots of unaccountability... forgive me for saying this. but isnt that called DECENTRALISATION. we need an information source not a leadership. pure and simple. a place to come to that can truly help people to learn about bitcoin from people that truly know what bitcoin is about that can help businesses set up API access to clients programs remotely from their website hosts. that can teach people and media the true ethos of bitcoin.

not a guy that says "i am Mr Bitcoin"

instead having a listing of guys in silicon valley that are creating business and want to help other businesses, guys in new yorks wall street that truly understand finance and exchanges, guys in asia that understand manufacturing and the supplychain that can work using bitcoin. guys in every country that have their own speciality that truly understand bitcoin.
that way there's always someone in each market, in each country that any of the community can use to be a spokesperson if a media story requiring certain topics around bitcoin to be answered. or be utilised to help expand bitcoin economy into the mainstream

not 4 special elected golden children of bitcoin with business cards saying they are CEO's and represent the nation of bitcoin, as if they are presidents of bitcoin

and what exactly will this user group do? what are its goals? what is its mission?

                                                   "not a guy that says "i am Mr Bitcoin""

There already is one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=191387.0

The press and "traditional" institutions will seek out "representatives" of bitcoin. You can't stop them, you can't tell them they're not representative.

Instead of finding representatives, I want them to find a vast association of users, with local chapters. No "representatives" other than the users themselves. If the users want to elect spokespeople in different geographies or disciplines they will. If they'd rather express themselves via Wiki, they will. If they want to nominate an intelligent Q&A Eliza bot, they will.

I'm not suggesting replacing the current crop of board members who "represent" bitcoin, with a new crop of elected board members who "represent" bitcoin - as you will see in my proposal, the board members are only caretakers of the organization's maintenance and internal finances. If you want to call them something else, we can.

In fact, if a board is too odious, let's run the organization with a lawyer as executor of the bylaws. Someone who isn't even remotely related to bitcoin, but only acts as a legal custodian.

Again I am open to all suggestions - don't mistake this proposal for one that replaces one board with another, that would be a waste of time.

My main model for this are organizations like the Silicon Valley Linux User Group, or many of the other chapters that exist around the world: http://www.svlug.org/about.php

Fittingly and amusingly, they decided (internally) to stop electing "Presidents" and "Vice Presidents" in 1999 and instead only elect functional roles, like webmaster and events manager. The people in these roles do not have any authority or policy making power. They just run the stuff based on an ad-hoc group of volunteers who help them. But the members ultimately direct the group through votes and meetings. That is the kind of association I'm looking to build.

Instead of putting $1000 in your 501, why not start a youtube channel and push your talent so the world can see. Promote bitcoin the way you see fit and have a clear vision of what you want. Sure crowdsourcing for idea and membership on a thread or on reddit is fun, but without the professional tools and $$ it it will be painfully slow. So why not have much more visibility? get a little cam or your iphone, a microphone and just hit the streets and ask people stuff.. Then you talk about bitcoin. You should watch some Tv evangelist shows. You don't have to believe but the tools of communication are the same if you want to be a bitcoin evangelist. As soon as you do this you create a brand and the "laws of attraction" will start kick in.

The concept of bitcoin is so big it is hard for all of us to let go the old paradigm. In the end bitcoin will define itself as it is math, without the need for PR. I understand we are not there yet.

Alright how about we work on developing a solid mission statement and organizational values?

One effort does not contradict the others. I am not interested in just being a "face" for bitcoin and I am capable of more than one thing at a time.

Here are the projects I'm currently working on:

- Open Paper Wallet - massively successful, created more than 20 creative commons licensed designs for the whole community - going into production - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155847.0;all

- SafePaperWallet.com - opening in a couple of weeks to sell retail paper wallet kits

- Open Bitcoin Store - helped 60 new stores launch in the first week - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=161264.0;all

- btcprice.info - serving thousands of SMS alerts on bitcoin price changes for free

- Let's Talk Bitcoin - I am a host and contributor, bi-weekly shows

- bitcoin 2013 conference - speaking about bitcoin neutrality and interviewing people. Also giving 4 interviews to the press (booked so far)

- Open Bitcoin User Group - this project

- Bitcoin book - proposals are out to publishers this week.

As you can see, I can keep up with multiple projects, lead them and make them successful.

Give me solutions or give me support, it's all welcome and appreciated. Tell me it can't be done and I will keep going right past you ;-)

Organizations exist to represent individuals working toward a common goal. There needs to be a clear cut agenda with solutions beyond the reach of the individual that require the efforts of the collective organization. The agenda needs to be more than “equal representation” and “caretakers of the organization's maintenance and internal finances.”

Why don’t you come up with a list of bullet points for the organizations agenda first and pitch organizational structure/membership dues later.

Go right ahead and help me make the agenda. I do not want to dominate the agenda or set "my" agenda.

Here are some of my ideas:

- Offer local chapter support for new bitcoin users
- Encourage bitcoin software development for a robust and diverse bitcoin software ecosystem
- Offer free classes, tutorials, after school programs and university guest lectures
- Create and promote bitcoin educational materials
- Offer local members as teachers, mentors, speakers for local events
- Coordinate community bitcoin events such as conferences, meetups and seminars
- Help local businesses adopt bitcoin with member technical and educational resources


Just off the top of my head.

I have a hard time explaining myself. Sorry. It was not about being a face to bitcoin but being a force for your vision that you are pushing on this thread. That was my simpleton solution. Everything else you do is is good and I am glad you are involve in so many projects, with or without me :-)

I totally get what you're saying. You have to be the change you want to see. You are correct, and I am trying to do that. I think this organization can pull in more individuals who are willing to work together towards these goals, explicitly and in an organized way.

You will always have my support in any way I can be useful. This is the kind of org bitcoin has needed all along.

Now you’re talking! Elaborate on these concepts by showing how they can be accomplished and ask for feedback on more ideas requiring a collective effort. Start a thread with a foundation set in your agenda and then setup the most amicable structure you can also using suggestions of the potential membership.

We need a website or at the very least a blog ASAP.

http://bitcoinusergroup.org/

That's the website. Still very basic, but we can start a discussion...

Temp Logo Suggestion:

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a613/Charles_Hoskinson/4239f126-f31a-418a-8c8d-138fa8dd5e5a_zpsf930fd37.jpg

I just made this as a filler until we have something official to call the org. Any quick changes?

More suggestions:
http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a613/Charles_Hoskinson/Capture_zpsbd23e66b.png

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a613/Charles_Hoskinson/Capture_zpse9ff6017.png

This is an admirable effort, but the Bitcoin community is so diverse, there's people who believe that taxation is theft, there's people who believe that the best way for bitcoin to succeed is to get government regulation, there's people who understand the codebase and how bitcoin works intimately and then there's people who lose bitcoins because they don't understand Change addresses.  Any proposal by the user group will end up with all these groups disagreeing with each other, and you'll end up with disenfranchised members and eventual RAGE QUIT.

There is a reason why most western democracies have grown to have elected representatives, simply giving power completely to each individual (even now, when we have the technology to support this) doesn't really work - there needs to be some structure to the decision making.  You might disagree with some of the approaches that the bitcoin foundation are taking, but really the best way (as with any form of government/representation) is to join the debate and try and change the views through reasoned arguments.

I wish you all the best for the user group, but I do fear that it will just become a very high maintenance (counting votes, managing membership) version of existing bitcointalk argument threads.

Will

Thank you will for your words of wisdom. I believe that with the amazing technology we have seen built over the last decade it is more possible now to build an organization as this one than ever before. Perhaps it will fail. Perhaps it will succeed, but remember the primary goal- to give everyone a voice. Exclusion and centralization are the two evils bitcoin seeks to slay.

We'd love some feedback on what you would suggest to do to avoid destructive debates.

I think it might be necessary to set a higher threshold for proposals to come to vote, to counteract fringe trolling. But at least this group will have a clear and transparent process. Rage quitting is what happens when you have no voice or way to be heard (or at least then it is justified). More voice, better process, clear and transparent rules make for less impotent rage.

Bitcointalk is great - but fills a different need. It is the town square. I want a ballot-proposition mechanism and local user chapters. I think nothing like that exists and there is both room for and need for it.

Don't tell me how it will fail (or do, I'll ignore it), tell me how to make it succeed. What needs to be done differently to overcome the issue you highlight?

You might also want to consider talking to the meetup groups. They are the closest thing we have to local chapters.


First, every vote needs to be directly tied to exactly one person. I like the hash system I proposed, but we could implement something different. Second, we need to find a way to keep debates both focused and highly specific. This is very difficult on the internet in my experience. Perhaps there could be a reward system for reaching consensus or some form of gamification?

I think a common approach to this problem is to have a method by which proposals can be put forward, support can be measured for the proposals, a threshold above which proposals are put to a public ballot, and then a threshold of participation/voting needed to pass a motion.  Then with the backing of this many people and the records of the debate, an way forward can be agreed (e.g. someone do coding, someone approach the press, someone make a new website)

The way that bitcoin has developed over the past few years has been very much based around - if you have an idea then code up a git pull request, show that it provides benefit and then it will eventually get adopted into the code.  This works if the people coming up with the ideas also have the ability to code them.  Of course, I presume the purpose of the user group would be to do more than just git pull requests to the bitcoin source - are you talking about also advocacy for legal standing/regulation.

Do you have an example of where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

Yes, that's what the initial rules propose. I had a 1% of membership approval threshold for putting a resolution to vote, but the number is just a placeholder. In fact, I can see a better way would be a dynamic system where the "difficulty" of passing a resolution adjusts to keep the number of votes at a manageable level. Kinda like the hashing difficulty.


Actually, code is the one thing this community will NOT have authority over. That's the only area the core developers DO have authority. This community would have less authority, less expertise and no need to be involved in core code. Leave that to the devs.

This is more about advocacy, education, world-press relations, local chapters, newbie support, local business support etc.


Do you have examples of where the community was consulted on an issue in anything more than a "let's pretend we haven't made the decision already" manner?

I see a lot of ad-hoc projects that are very interesting and useful. Then I see a few organized and centralized entities which have a lot of power and no accountability. I see nothing in between

I asked first :)

I think you'll find that there is a *lot* of discussion on the bitcoin irc channel(s), on the git pull request(s), and a bit on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, all of which are open and anyone can participate in.  Once again - I'd be interested if you could point out a situation where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

wait, isnt this what bitcointalk.org is for?

How about asking theymos for a subforum? 

I'm all for us pooling our ideas and resources.

So, is this a conversation or just goading? I fail to see where holding your breath for a reply, or nee-ner, nee-ner is bringing the community closer to discussion of a User Group?

Andreas, you have my attention and I'll help out anyway I can.
Local exposure here in the Maritimes, nationally here in Canada, quizzing, educating, meetings, whatever.

WillPhase, you have a great forum here to supply all knowledge concerning hardware/mining/pools and such.
Any devs needing help for anything other than altcoin, good luck with that.
I want User Groups, and I want it soon. Not a troll-pile sent by other devs to derp,derp the hell out of threads that have nothing to do with them or their projects.
Find a thread on bitcointalk.org that has not been overrun with FUD, only exists on the hardware/mining/pools section. Because you would not put up with that if someone went all out, misdirection lying herp derp on your frequent hangouts. You cleaned out your deadwood, we do not have that option because the nature of education and development.

I suspect you're going to need to show a bit more leadership at least initially.

Whilst canvassing ideas and suggestions is a great start, there'll need to come a time for solid action in a direction that might not appease all camps.

You'll unlikely be able to build a working organisation on consensus alone.

I'm actually genuinely trying to understand the reasons behind this and why it's needed on top of the existing methods of communication.


I'm not sure this would be any different in a user group - the same people who participate in bitcointalk will participate in this user group - there was a reason why the devs (almost completely) left bitcointalk for irc and git and mailing lists - and there was a reason why they moved the forums from *.bitcoin.org domain name...

I wish this group the best of luck, I agree with several of the other people here that probably the best approach is to come up with some ground rules (e.g. the number of votes to set forth a motion, voting procedures, things like that) then set up some kind of forum (could be based on bitcointalk.org - I'm sure theymos would set up a subgroup if you ask nicely).  I don't think trying to come to a consensus on how a consensus should be arrived at will work :)

Regarding helping people - I actually find it far more rewarding to help people posting in /r/bitcoin than here - since people actually seem grateful of information rather than trying to turn every single thread into a flamewar/argument.

Will

I agree with you about! Do you remember the first alt coins and BTCExpress/LukeJr.? I left, couldn't stand it. I would ask a question on certain IRC channels and get pissy/no replies because everybody had stakes in the game. Turf wars over nothing. MikeH&MikeG/Gavin/Hal were not always available to bounce ideas off of. TVM and PAL technologies are tough curves for a Flash programmer. oof!
The amount of trolling is getting exponential.
We need a place for educating newbs/alt-devs/afficianados of every ilk so the pressure is removed off the forums. I watched Matthew N Wright chase a new forum member around for 4-5 days calling him Atlas,?!? ... really? Ignore buttons don't change the fact of ignorant.
How do you keep the hardware/mining/pools forum so clean? I know humor and tough skin help but newbies can't tell who is serious and who is not. I would not invite my enemies to these forums because of the way any/all topics get smeared with equal/magnanimous shit. I just want a forum/user group where "here is where you get x information" not buffalo crap and bananas.

*edit forgot an h!

any place where multiple voices come together and try having an opinion will always have others that object. so instead of having closed communities, or voting systems that have a tiered approach of 1, is the topic even worthy of voting for 2. then voting for it. i find it alot better to just provide all the advice and assistance there is without limits and allow individuals/groups to then grab whats important to them, what bit would help them out most and then they use it within their region/ group or project.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list of businesses that accept bitcoin. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list anyone thats not afraid of getting on camera that wants to be a media contact. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

easiest way to do it is to have a subforum here called the 'community suggestions' where the replies will be the solutions to the topic requests

After a break-through on the press center issue, I will be distracted for a few days because I am FORKING the press center.

bitcoinpresscenter.org will be the inclusive press center that does not live on bitcoin.org. More info to follow, site up by Monday

explanation?

If Matt wants to call me a tool for donating my time and money to help people learn about bitcoin for free, then that's his prerogative. I just dislike his publication will not help us broadcast to the bitcoin community our project and its goals.



Simple, he is a leader and a CEO with resources. When someone who is proactive sees something unjust, he does something about it. We'll have a better more beautiful and inclusive press center in a few days.

the primary issue of the existing press center on bitcoin.org was that because it was embedded in a site with other content and multiple conflicts of interest, there was a perceived need to control access and preserve some sense of "moderation". That was misguided and ended up causing a crisis of leadership, an uproar from the community and a running battle on github pull requests.

After a long and protracted argument, which admittedly got heated on all sides (I am not too proud about some of the things I said or the way I said them), it appears that the press center will be removed from bitcoin.org. It was too political to b housed in such a prominent community site.

What I am offering is to do the work (in the next week) to produce a site that has no other purpose than to be a neutral and inclusive press center, geared towards functionality and offering a powerful tool for the world press. My experience in press relations has guided me to add many features currently missing from the press center, simple things that journalists need. For example:

- Filters for language spoken
- Multiple resolution pictures and a press-kit for each representative
- A standard attribution blurb, short and long bio
etc.

I will be putting together the platform and then inviting people to fill it as inclusively as possible with press contacts. The process for nomination is TBD, but it will err towards inclusion and will not have any veto wielding powers.

This solves the main problem that led to the call for a user group. Though that negates the need to do the user group right now, I still plan on doing it at a slower and less urgent pace. In the mean time, I am liberating the press center and giving the control to the community at large.

Another thing happened today: Sirius who is the actual owner of the domain dropped in after the week long debate and said he thought the concerns were valid and the press center should not live in bitcoin.org. That probably settles the issue. In a power game, the big kahuna just spoke.

More to come soon.

Making great progress aantonop

just viewed http://bitcoinpresscenter.org/ (http://bitcoinpresscenter.org/) and also heard it on the podcast on lets-talk-bitcoin and this is what i call an open platform to allow anyone who has confidence to talk to the press to submit themselves as contacts, showing what type of contact with media you prefer EG interview, live interview, written etc.

great work to whoever is involved in setting up this better option for bitcoin press

this is a good thing

now all that is required:
1)add an additional feature for location as well as language because to get some local confidence in bitcoin and not have the U.S domination :D

2)to google search bitcoin news stories, find the editors email addresses and link them to the service

Franky,

1) There is a filter on the left for language, country and timezone. They are cumulative filters so you can narrow down to exactly the right person even if there are thousands. So if you want a Finnish speaking, bitcoin miner with development experience who lives in Poland, you can find exactly that.

2) I would welcome any help to spread the word and add materials. I'm planning on breaking out the "citations" into a separate section where all bitcoin mentions and articles can be submitted and rated.

I really like the press center. I'd like if we could develop some form of feature request/ feedback system for future improvements or to report bugs. Yet it is sufficient in its current form for its purpose.

Sounds like a good idea but I wouldn't suggest making it in the USA. Would be great if there was another bitcoin group centered in south america, europe, etc that dealt mainly with spreading bitcoins to those regions.