Bitcoin Forum

Bitcointalk was originally a forum under www.bitcoin.org/smf/ and then later on a subdomain at forums.bitcoin.org but it isn't anymore.

Here is the 2011 announcement (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=33393.msg417531#msg417531), but it doesn't give the backstory.

It seems like people have been systematically nuking logs of Bitcoin's history off the Internet for whatever reason, so many of you who weren't personally there and involved in 2011 probably have not seen this bit of history.

I'll just let the chat logs tell the story of why it was moved and how it got the name bitcointalk.

(I've trimmed out some irrelevant cross-talk and bolded a few lines for interesting events)


2011-06-12 01:47:41 <ArtForz>   gaah, I'm gone for 3 days and someone lets the trolls on the forums?
2011-06-12 01:51:52 <noagendamarket>   the trolls are really bad
2011-06-12 01:51:57 <ArtForz>   yup
2011-06-12 01:52:13 <ArtForz>   are the forum mods on vacation or something?
2011-06-12 01:52:21 <noagendamarket>   anyone would think they unleashed the troll army :)
2011-06-12 01:53:13 <noagendamarket>   It feels like world of warcraft
2011-06-12 01:54:55 <jgarzik>   ArtForz: sigh :(
2011-06-12 01:55:08 <jgarzik>   ArtForz: current email discussion between devs + prominent bitcoiners, about that.
2011-06-12 01:55:26 <jgarzik>   ArtForz: we have concluded the forums are totally useless.  Gavin just created bitcoin-development mailing list.
2011-06-12 01:55:39 <jgarzik>   ArtForz: current forum mods are "anti censorship"
2011-06-12 01:56:10 <MC1984>   still trying to stir fud
2011-06-12 01:56:13 <gjs278>   where is the list
2011-06-12 01:56:45 <jgarzik>   ArtForz: Long term, one proposal is to swap weusecoins forum with current forum, and enforce "business professional" code of conduct on the new forum
2011-06-12 01:56:49 <jgarzik>   gjs278: sourceforge
2011-06-12 01:57:03 <gjs278>   ok
2011-06-12 01:57:23 <ArtForz>   jgarzik: soudns good
2011-06-12 01:58:14 <ArtForz>   trying to read up in the general and mining forums... ugh.
2011-06-12 01:58:18 <jgarzik>   indeed
2011-06-12 02:00:00 <dirtyfilthy>   i think somethingawful good squad has been deployed
2011-06-12 02:00:05 <noagendamarket>   yep
2011-06-12 02:00:20 <noagendamarket>   someone paid a bounty to have their site hacked
2011-06-12 02:00:26 <noagendamarket>   lol
2011-06-12 02:01:27 <jgarzik>   anyway, until the forum swap, we need triage
2011-06-12 02:01:36 <jgarzik>   either "no newbie posts" or "newbies cannot create threads" or somesuch
2011-06-12 02:01:47 <ArtForz>   how about "nuke it from orbit" ?
2011-06-12 02:01:58 <ArtForz>   j/k
2011-06-12 02:02:07 <ArtForz>   well, it's the only way to be sure...
2011-06-12 02:02:09 <jgarzik>   :)
...
2011-06-12 02:16:50 <MC1984>   wow the bitcoin forums are irredeemable
2011-06-12 02:31:39 <jgarzik>   MC1984: yes
2011-06-12 02:37:04 <brocktice>   MC1984: Yeah I haven't delved in  much lately, I hear it's troll central?
2011-06-12 02:38:16 <noagendamarket>   the forums hit a trollberg
2011-06-12 02:40:43 <Diablo-D3>   the bitcoin forums are just too high traffic
2011-06-12 02:40:48 <theymos>   Who here uses the forum a lot and wants to be a mod?
2011-06-12 02:40:49 <Diablo-D3>   I dont read any of it except very specific threads
2011-06-12 02:40:54 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: me.
2011-06-12 02:41:04 <Diablo-D3>   I just want mod powers on the mining part
2011-06-12 02:41:37 <jgarzik>   theymos: will you give me permission to lock just about even damn thread?  :)  or prevent newbies from creating new threads?
2011-06-12 02:41:38 <theymos>   Your account is "DiabloD3"?
2011-06-12 02:41:42 <jgarzik>   *every
2011-06-12 02:41:54 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: yes
2011-06-12 02:41:57 <theymos>   No point in locking them -- just delete troll threads.
2011-06-12 02:42:05 <jgarzik>   that works too
2011-06-12 02:42:14 <noagendamarket>   lock them unless you have certain post levels
2011-06-12 02:42:30 <theymos>   They're all backed up in case of false positives. There's too much junk. Lots needs to be deleted.
2011-06-12 02:42:37 <jgarzik>   yep
2011-06-12 02:42:57 <jgarzik>   theymos: and _please_ don't post a "moved" or "deleted" thread, for each one...
2011-06-12 02:42:58 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: you can set it so only established users can start threads
2011-06-12 02:43:00 <jgarzik>   shades of Kiba
2011-06-12 02:43:22 <theymos>   I'm going to prevent non-established posters from posting at all for a while.
2011-06-12 02:43:46 <Diablo-D3>   why not just turn registrations off for awhile
2011-06-12 02:43:52 <Diablo-D3>   OOH
2011-06-12 02:43:53 <Diablo-D3>   I KNOW
2011-06-12 02:43:55 <Diablo-D3>   HEY THEYMOS
2011-06-12 02:44:03 <Diablo-D3>   MAKE PEOPLE PAY BTC FOR NEW ACCOUNT
2011-06-12 02:44:13 <theymos>   jgarzik and Diablo are now global moderators (for now). Please only delete spam and trolling.
2011-06-12 02:44:33 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: how do I sticky threads?
2011-06-12 02:44:39 <theymos>   Don't sticky threads.
...
2011-06-12 03:07:07 <jgarzik>   theymos: how/where do I delete an entire thread?
2011-06-12 03:07:25 <jgarzik>   theymos: I see 'Delete' beside each post, but not at top where I would expect
2011-06-12 03:07:28 <theymos>   jgarzik: Bottom of the thread, "remove topic".
2011-06-12 03:08:26 <jgarzik>   theymos: tnx
2011-06-12 03:09:13 <theymos>   SMF is really not good for fighting trolls. It's too much work to take any administrative action. I used to moderate on a site where moderation was so easy a single person could fight an active invasion of twice this size or more. Probably I'll make modifications in this area once I get time.
2011-06-12 03:13:10 <jgarzik>   theymos: ugh
2011-06-12 03:13:17 <jgarzik>   theymos: fscking impossible, with the forum so slow
2011-06-12 03:13:19 <jgarzik>   I give up
2011-06-12 03:13:29 <theymos>   It seems pretty fast to me.
2011-06-12 03:14:07 <jgarzik>   theymos: deleting 1,001 troll threads one at a time is... tedious, even if it only takes ~10-20 seconds per thread
2011-06-12 03:14:27 <theymos>   jgarzik: enable quick-moderation in your profile settings. You'll get checkboxes for threads.
2011-06-12 03:15:14 <theymos>   Here's the page with the setting: https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35;sa=theme . It's near the bottom.
2011-06-12 03:15:24 <noagendamarket>   can we get a proper forum software ffs
2011-06-12 03:15:29 <jgarzik>   theymos: that helps
2011-06-12 03:15:34 <genewitch>   theymos: i've been posting all day... it just blocked me out after 6 hours
2011-06-12 03:15:42 <theymos>   genewitch: I just changed the policy.
2011-06-12 03:16:38 <jgarzik>   theymos: can we disable animated images?
2011-06-12 03:16:40 <theymos>   genewitch: I will whitelist you. Just a moment.
2011-06-12 03:16:44 <genewitch>   Thank you sir.
2011-06-12 03:16:48 <jgarzik>   theymos: image spam drowns out a lot of threads, too
2011-06-12 03:16:49 <genewitch>   or ma'am
2011-06-12 03:17:44 <Diablo-D3>   dear lord
2011-06-12 03:17:48 <Diablo-D3>   the rest of the forum
2011-06-12 03:17:51 <Diablo-D3>   is whacko bullshit
2011-06-12 03:17:57 <theymos>   Delete it all.
2011-06-12 03:18:03 <luke-jr>   theymos: what will it take to split the dev/mining forums appropriately?
2011-06-12 03:18:04 <Diablo-D3>   http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=15351.msg204817
2011-06-12 03:18:08 <Diablo-D3>   this thread for one
2011-06-12 03:18:42 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: think I should nuke it? its troll vs troll vs troll cagematch kinda shit
2011-06-12 03:19:05 <theymos>   I locked it because there seemed to be some OK responses. But I dont' really care.
2011-06-12 03:19:27 <Diablo-D3>   so I can nuke it? I dont think we really need this shit even readable
2011-06-12 03:19:34 <theymos>   Sure.
2011-06-12 03:19:42 <luke-jr>   eek, does Diablo-D3 have mod access? :>   
2011-06-12 03:19:44 <genewitch>   I didn't notice much spam on the devel boards
2011-06-12 03:19:55 <luke-jr>   genewitch: it could use categorization though
2011-06-12 03:19:59 <Diablo-D3>   15_year_old_blonde probably should be banned too
2011-06-12 03:20:07 <theymos>   Diablo-D3: Already done.
2011-06-12 03:20:13 <luke-jr>   genewitch: for the many different softwares or at least types of software
2011-06-12 03:20:34 <genewitch>   do i have to delete a cookie to get my "reply" button back?
2011-06-12 03:20:55 <theymos>   genewitch: Are you able to post now?
2011-06-12 03:21:52 <genewitch>   theymos: no, not in the Bitcoin Forum > Bitcoin > Project Development
2011-06-12 03:21:55 <genewitch>   threads
2011-06-12 03:21:58 <theymos>   genewitch: Oh, wait. It didn't work. It might take me a bit to figure this out.
...
2011-06-12 03:31:03 <luke-jr>   theymos: why the heck is Diablo-D3 a mod? he's a freaking troll
2011-06-12 03:31:56 <theymos>   luke-jr: Maybe that will help him to identify other trolls. ;)
...
2011-06-12 03:33:19 <theymos>   Global mods made tonight are probably temporary. This mess just needs to be cleaned up. Though DiabloD3 will probably stay at least a local mod of mining, since he is a long-time community member with expertise in this area.
...
2011-06-12 04:02:40 <jgarzik>   theymos: is there any way to make someone read-only (disable posting)?  Atlas isn't too happy about the animated image thing :)
2011-06-12 04:03:25 <jgarzik>   theymos: I don't want to ban him, though
2011-06-12 04:03:27 <theymos>   jgarzik: What animated image thing?
2011-06-12 04:03:28 <genewitch>   jgarzik: not here, and there's no errors whatsoever :-/ but clients can connect to it, and bitcoind hands out work just fine, and the frontend is assigning passwords and stuff
2011-06-12 04:03:35 <jgarzik>   theymos: animated image signature
2011-06-12 04:03:59 <theymos>   Are you deleting all of his posts because he has an animated signature? :(
2011-06-12 04:04:19 <jgarzik>   Diablo-D3: I don't want to ban him permanently
2011-06-12 04:04:24 <jgarzik>   theymos: damn right I am
2011-06-12 04:04:33 <luke-jr>   ………….
2011-06-12 04:04:33 <Diablo-D3>   jgarzik: well, give him a warning
2011-06-12 04:04:37 <Diablo-D3>   be an annoying fucker again
2011-06-12 04:04:38 <Diablo-D3>   its perm
2011-06-12 04:04:44 <theymos>   That's not cool. He has lots of good posts. I'll just remove his signature.
2011-06-12 04:04:45 <jgarzik>   Diablo-D3: already done -- and already ignored
2011-06-12 04:05:10 <jgarzik>   <shrug> he refuses to change his sig.  making a personal stand.  I presume he will just change his sig back.
2011-06-12 04:05:13 <Diablo-D3>   images shouldnt be allowed in sigs
2011-06-12 04:05:20 <jgarzik>   Diablo-D3: 1000% agreed
2011-06-12 04:06:10 <jgarzik>   theymos: whatever makes his sig stop appearing, that's fine
2011-06-12 04:12:51 <theymos>   jgarzik is no longer a moderator because I now have to restore like 50 of Atlas's posts...
2011-06-12 04:21:11 <jgarzik>   theymos: <rolls eyes>
2011-06-12 04:21:21 <jgarzik>   Just confirms that the forum is toast
2011-06-12 04:21:29 <Diablo-D3>   the forum has too much fucking traffic
2011-06-12 04:21:33 <Diablo-D3>   but I think I saved the mining forum
2011-06-12 04:21:37 <Diablo-D3>   er, section
2011-06-12 04:21:45 <gmaxwell>   :-/
2011-06-12 04:21:50 <gmaxwell>   The forum is a cesspool.
2011-06-12 04:21:51 <jgarzik>   Diablo-D3: bitcoin-development list was just created @ SF by Gavin
2011-06-12 04:21:56 <jgarzik>   devs agree
2011-06-12 04:22:08 <gmaxwell>   I don't know what posts that jgarzik moderated, but I find it hard to believe that it wasn't crap.
2011-06-12 04:22:09 <Diablo-D3>   jgarzik: url?
2011-06-12 04:22:16 <jgarzik>   and it's utterly impossible to show forum to reporters or business professionals
2011-06-12 04:22:50 <jgarzik>   Diablo-D3: https://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=244765
2011-06-12 04:23:31 <theymos>   The forum is more than just Bitcoin development. It is (supposed to be) a good, low-moderation forum for discussion of many topics. Moderation needs to be increased when there is a ton of trolls, however.
2011-06-12 04:23:44 <gmaxwell>   What jgarzik said. I'm embarassed to tell friends about bitcoin for fear that they'll load the forums and find a wall of dickhead blabbering on about black helicopters and prediction markets for killing babies or whatever.
2011-06-12 04:24:28 <Diablo-D3>   yeah
2011-06-12 04:24:34 <jgarzik>   discussion among devs + major exchange ops + major pool ops seems to lean towards swapping weusecoins forum with current forum
2011-06-12 04:24:45 <jgarzik>   and then pushing for "business professional" conduct
2011-06-12 04:25:14 <Graet>   i like that
2011-06-12 04:25:50 <Graet>   is there somwhere small/new pool owners can join to observe (apart from in here?)
2011-06-12 04:25:58 <gmaxwell>   I do too. I'm not really too concerned with people being rude as I am about people being crazy. But asking people to behave professional is probable adequate.
2011-06-12 04:26:31 <noagendamarket>   jgarzik that sounds like an excellent idea
2011-06-12 04:26:36 <genewitch>   people who own fast video cards generally aren't professional
2011-06-12 04:26:41 <genewitch>   i'm just throwing that out there.
2011-06-12 04:27:32 <jgarzik>   genewitch: and they can stay on the "old" forum after the switch...
2011-06-12 04:27:38 <jgarzik>   genewitch: you're not wrong, though :)
2011-06-12 04:28:13 <theymos>   A separate professional forum is fine, but I like the "unprofessional" forum.
2011-06-12 04:28:58 <gmaxwell>   genewitch: Even most 14 year olds can behave if required to. I don't see the problem there.
2011-06-12 04:29:07 <jgarzik>   theymos: it needs to move away from *.bitcoin.org
2011-06-12 04:29:19 <noagendamarket>   just make the current forum nsfw/unregulated as a section in the new forum
2011-06-12 04:29:34 <jgarzik>   noagendamarket: no, that just leads downhill quickly
2011-06-12 04:29:46 <genewitch>   e.g. 4chan
2011-06-12 04:29:51 <jgarzik>   yes
2011-06-12 04:29:58 <gmaxwell>   theymos: sure, there should be a forum to shitcan the nutbags into so they can talk about buying babymulching with bitcon without bothering everyone else.
2011-06-12 04:30:25 <gmaxwell>   genewitch: "the letter b means bitcoin, go post over there"
2011-06-12 04:30:25 <theymos>   I happen to like 4chan...
2011-06-12 04:30:33 <Netsniper>   you can buy babymulchers with bitcoins?
2011-06-12 04:31:00 <nanotube>   theymos: what about making a mod queue, assuming we can get enough reasonable people to be mods? before post goes live, has to be approved?
2011-06-12 04:31:13 <gmaxwell>   Netsniper: dunno but if so you'd expect to learn all about it in graphic detail on the bitcoin forums.
2011-06-12 04:31:37 <nanotube>   theymos: can mark certain users as perma-ok, so only need to do this on new people. good way to thwart trollwaves?
2011-06-12 04:31:54 <gmaxwell>   nanotube:  I think theymos already commented on what he thought about reasonable moderation above when he commented on jgarzik moderating.
2011-06-12 04:32:35 <theymos>   nanotube: I'd be OK with that (for new users). Maybe only enabled when there are lots of trolls.
2011-06-12 04:32:46 <nanotube>   theymos: right, a 'panic mode' :)
2011-06-12 04:32:52 <theymos>   Yes.
2011-06-12 04:32:54 <noagendamarket>   heh
2011-06-12 04:32:57 <nanotube>   gmaxwell: :)
2011-06-12 04:33:12 <theymos>   I increased required time between posts to 5 minutes. I bet that'll help.
2011-06-12 04:33:31 <nanotube>   how hard would it be to implement? does that come built into smf, the mod-queue bits?
2011-06-12 04:33:46 <gmaxwell>   That will just annoy normal users and the crapflooders who don't know how to select tor exits, no?
2011-06-12 04:33:55 <nanotube>   Graet: cheers :)
2011-06-12 04:34:01 <Graet>   :)
2011-06-12 04:34:03 <theymos>   nanotube: It doesn't come built in.
2011-06-12 04:34:11 <nanotube>   gmaxwell: based on user accounts, not ips.
2011-06-12 04:34:24 <nanotube>   gmaxwell: and based on account age
2011-06-12 04:34:44 <nanotube>   so 'normal users' who are not made-this-week, won't see any changes, ideally.
2011-06-12 04:34:48 <theymos>   I would totally redesign the forum system if I had time. The current moderation scheme is very bad.
2011-06-12 04:35:09 <nanotube>   theymos: well, how about phpbb's system? that seems to be the most popular forum sw
2011-06-12 04:35:19 <nanotube>   though i can't say i have experience with it myself
2011-06-12 04:35:23 <theymos>   That's just about the same, IIRC.
2011-06-12 04:35:28 <jgarzik>   [ANN] New bitcoin development mailing list - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=15527.0
2011-06-12 04:35:31 <nanotube>   theymos: iow, also shitty?
2011-06-12 04:35:50 <nanotube>   jgarzik: who controls who's allowed to post? hope that's moderated.
2011-06-12 04:36:47 <gmaxwell>   nanotube: usually unmoderating new users on the first good post, and then kicking off people who are complete idiots is more than enough.
2011-06-12 04:37:04 <gmaxwell>   I think most of the problems on the forums are a few jerks plus an overall stupid culture.
2011-06-12 04:37:12 <Diablo-D3>   theymos: so, lets see if my plan cuts down on the absolute bullshit that is the miner section
2011-06-12 04:37:15 <Diablo-D3>   gmaxwell: dude
2011-06-12 04:37:18 <Diablo-D3>   90% of people
2011-06-12 04:37:20 <Diablo-D3>   suck dick
2011-06-12 04:37:40 <Diablo-D3>   hitler was wrong... why kill jews when you can ground stupid people up for cat food?
2011-06-12 04:37:42 <gmaxwell>   Diablo-D3: most people can pretend to be reasonable if they know that its required and expected.
2011-06-12 04:37:50 <Diablo-D3>   gmaxwell: bullshit
2011-06-12 04:38:03 <nanotube>   gmaxwell: that'd work just as well. as long as there's /some/ barrier to entry, in addition to just creating an account. :)
2011-06-12 04:38:06 <Diablo-D3>   do I have to go find the commercial from that one movie theatre that bans text messages?
2011-06-12 04:38:28 <gmaxwell>   I mean, I assume you have a job and such— and that you don't act like you do on IRC everywhere else…
2011-06-12 04:38:31 <gmaxwell>   ;)
2011-06-12 04:39:57 <jgarzik>   nanotube: unmoderated... we'll see what happens
2011-06-12 04:40:10 <theymos>   Anyone want to be a mod for the newbie section? It's going too fast for me to handle.
2011-06-12 04:40:18 <jgarzik>   nanotube: I doubt 4chan people know what email is ;)
2011-06-12 04:40:38 <nanotube>   jgarzik: haha they can probably read wikipedia about it and figure it out, given sufficient time, though. :)
2011-06-12 04:40:41 <theymos>   You know, there are plenty of very good discussions on 4chan outside of /b/...
2011-06-12 04:40:45 <Diablo-D3>   gmaxwell: nope, I pretty much wont stand for bullshit anywhere
2011-06-12 04:41:19 <nanotube>   theymos: what's the newbie section? must be new? :) is it "people with accounts < 1week old can only post here" board? or some such?
2011-06-12 04:41:20 <gmaxwell>   nanotube: if it gets too bad require new users pay 1btc to the faucet to join. ;)
2011-06-12 04:41:21 <genewitch>   i may be biased but as i mentioned earlier xkcd forums sort of automod anyone that posts pictures, links, etc in the first 10 posts, and usually require the first post to be in a huge newbie introduction thread.
2011-06-12 04:41:35 <genewitch>   it's a tiny barrier to entry, that will shuffle out all but the most anal of trolls
2011-06-12 04:42:02 <gmaxwell>   genewitch: barriers to entry usually toss more good users than trolls... you only notice the troll reduction.
2011-06-12 04:42:05 <theymos>   nanotube: Yes, though it's based on post counts since SMF doesn't support age restrictions (or at least not both age+post, which is necessary).
2011-06-12 04:42:08 <nanotube>   gmaxwell: haha indeed, that'd be cool.
2011-06-12 04:42:47 <nanotube>   theymos: ah i see. well, the ability to pump up post count by spamming the newbie section seems... counterproductive. :)
2011-06-12 04:42:51 <gmaxwell>   genewitch: a troll is trying to cause trouble and is burning effort to do it. A good person is probably instead trying to do _you_ a favor. Making it cost more to do you good isn't a good tradeoff.
2011-06-12 04:43:01 <theymos>   nanotube: That's why mods are needed.
2011-06-12 04:43:23 <nanotube>   so is that section auto-moderated? i.e., post doesn't make it through before mod lets it?
2011-06-12 04:43:26 <genewitch>   i would mod if i had time
2011-06-12 04:43:36 <theymos>   nanotube: Nope, SMF doesn't support that, either.
...
2011-06-14 17:59:54 <topi`>   jgarzik: what's your issue with drugs, anywys?
2011-06-14 18:00:18 <topi`>   of course drugs ought to be mentioned whenever somebody mentions bitcoin :D
2011-06-14 18:00:35 <sipa>   ...
2011-06-14 18:00:43 <topi`>   it's just unfortunate that drugs are not mentioned whenever people talk about plain chas.
2011-06-14 18:00:46 <topi`>   cash.
2011-06-14 18:00:54 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: only if you want to give schumer and his ilk more ammo ...
2011-06-14 18:01:02 <topi`>   sorry to come in the discussion too late :D wife needed help with homework
2011-06-14 18:01:22 <topi`>   jrmithdobbs: I regard that as a problem internal to the USA
2011-06-14 18:01:46 <topi`>   although I'm losing faith that something as stupid would not happen in european politics.
2011-06-14 18:01:58 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: whether you like or not us legislation against bitcoin will have global consequences
2011-06-14 18:02:11 <topi`>   jrmithdobbs: that remains to be seen (I don't believe that personally)
2011-06-14 18:02:30 <topi`>   some african countries will find out that they benefit immensely from things like bitcoin
2011-06-14 18:02:35 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: just like anti-internet-gambling laws, KYC, etc haven't had global implications *rolleyes*
2011-06-14 18:02:38 <topi`>   of course Mugabe will try to ban it :)
2011-06-14 18:03:03 <jrmithdobbs>   (if you don't catch the sarcasm they ... they very obviously have)
2011-06-14 18:03:21 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: or the DMCA etc, the list goes on
2011-06-14 18:03:44 <topi`>   yep, it all started with DMCA
2011-06-14 18:03:51 <topi`>   I think it was already back in 2000
2011-06-14 18:04:10 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: point was, us legislation against is detrimental no matter what you think of the US and it's foreign policy
2011-06-14 18:04:20 <topi`>   but I have funded EFF, for what it's worth, in order to fight these things
2011-06-14 18:04:28 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: therefore distancing official stances from LOL DRUGS LOL and silkroad is beneficial.
2011-06-14 18:04:30 <TD>   well, the EFF didn't want your donations, it turns out
2011-06-14 18:04:41 <TD>   they're giving the funding back, perhaps to the faucet
2011-06-14 18:04:49 <TD>   (i mean the bitcoin funding)
2011-06-14 18:05:01 <jrmithdobbs>   TD: they couldn't figure out how to tax it / etc
2011-06-14 18:05:18 <cosurgi>   forum is slashdotted?
2011-06-14 18:05:28 <TD>   topi`: anyway the people actually doing work don't tend to agree with you
2011-06-14 18:05:36 <jrmithdobbs>   diki: "patterns" always emerge to those looking for them. they're usually false patterns.
2011-06-14 18:05:47 <TD>   topi`: if you think it's a good idea to heavily promote criminal behavior as a use case for bitcoin, you need to familiarize yourself with the eGold case
2011-06-14 18:05:50 <topi`>   TD: what kind of work?
2011-06-14 18:05:50 <diki>   i sincerely hope
2011-06-14 18:05:55 <diki>   that you are not right
2011-06-14 18:05:58 <TD>   topi`: writing code. running exchanges, etc
2011-06-14 18:06:06 <topi`>   TD: drugs aren't criminal things in some countries
2011-06-14 18:06:12 <TD>   no, but they are in many
2011-06-14 18:06:17 <topi`>   alcohol is a drug, for what it's worth
2011-06-14 18:06:17 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: doesn't matter
2011-06-14 18:06:18 <TD>   like the countries where developers live
2011-06-14 18:06:32 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: all the actual work on bitcoin and related software is verifiably being done in places where they are illegal
2011-06-14 18:06:53 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: you realise that anti-bitcoin legislation would make jgarzik and gavin criminals defacto, right?
2011-06-14 18:06:59 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: you understand why this is bad, right?
2011-06-14 18:07:11 <TD>   sadly a lot of people jumping on the bitcoin bandwagon, apparently don't understand that
2011-06-14 18:07:32 <jrmithdobbs>   topi`: if the lead devs can no longer contribute because of legal hassles it will come tumbling down
2011-06-14 18:07:50 <jeremias>   hmm
2011-06-14 18:08:02 <jeremias>   isn't bitcoin software pretty stable currently
2011-06-14 18:08:09 <TD>   it needs constant work to keep up with the network scaling
2011-06-14 18:08:18 <TD>   not having devs is not an option. the system is already creaking under the load
...
2011-06-14 18:10:04 <TD>   anyway, bitcoin has no future as a purely black market currency, because you need to be able to exchange with existing currencies
2011-06-14 18:14:14 <TD>   anyway. to get back "on topic", public service announcement:   do not promote drugs or other criminal activity as a legitimate use case of bitcoin
...
2011-06-15 03:29:06 <jgarzik>   theymos: what's the status on moving the forums to another domain?
2011-06-15 03:29:42 <theymos>   I don't like the idea, so I'm not going to do it. Sirius can do it if he wants.
2011-06-15 03:31:59 <jgarzik>   rather unilateral, for a decentralized project
...
2011-06-15 03:35:29 <jgarzik>   genewitch: no, pretty much the entire dev team, major pool operators, major exchange ops, and lots of users think the forums have become a ghetto, and are becoming an embarrassment to the bitcoin project
2011-06-15 03:35:44 <jgarzik>   one person disagrees
2011-06-15 03:35:55 <genewitch>   jgarzik: ask moot to make a /bc/ topic
2011-06-15 03:36:02 <jgarzik>   rofl
2011-06-15 03:36:22 <genewitch>   i only see the dev forums and the pool forums sometimes, so i don't see the ghetto.
2011-06-15 03:37:09 <genewitch>   jgarzik: so the dev team and pool operators want a seperate more professional forum?
2011-06-15 03:37:41 <jgarzik>   genewitch: a more professional forum, yes, but more importantly stop presenting the current forum as "The Official Bitcoin Project Forum"
2011-06-15 03:38:04 <jgarzik>   which it's not, with so many major peeps abandoning it
2011-06-15 03:38:14 <theymos>   I'm in support of not presenting it as the official forum. I just don't want to move it from bitcoin.org.
2011-06-15 03:38:29 <jgarzik>   theymos: anything on bitcoin.org is clearly official
2011-06-15 03:38:49 <theymos>   Let's change that perception.
2011-06-15 03:39:03 <genewitch>   jgarzik: you want the "good" forums on forum.bitcoin.org and the current forums on a different domain?
2011-06-15 03:39:10 <jgarzik>   theymos: show me _one_ other person who actually thinks that is possible.  just one.
2011-06-15 03:39:26 <theymos>   I'm sure I could find someone if I asked around.
2011-06-15 03:39:42 <jgarzik>   bitcoin.org was started by satoshi, and it's all over the print media, online media, search engines and ... duh .. it matches the project's name.
2011-06-15 03:39:45 <genewitch>   does that mean like drop database and start over with forum.bitcoin.org?
2011-06-15 03:39:50 <jgarzik>   nobody thinks that is realistic
2011-06-15 03:39:53 <jgarzik>   genewitch: no!
2011-06-15 03:39:55 <theymos>   The weusecoins guy reacted positively to my idea.
2011-06-15 03:39:58 <cacheson>   theymos: people are naturally going to assume that subdomains of bitcoin are official, there's nothing you can really do about that
2011-06-15 03:40:09 <cacheson>   er, subdomains of bitcoin.org
2011-06-15 03:40:27 <jgarzik>   genewitch: no one is proposing deleting or turning off anything
2011-06-15 03:40:31 <jgarzik>   genewitch: just moving away from *.bitcoin.org
2011-06-15 03:40:36 <theymos>   Not very "decentralized" of you to demand that any website be "official" at all. I argue that there should be no official websites.
2011-06-15 03:40:47 <genewitch>   except mine
2011-06-15 03:40:49 <genewitch>   mine is official
2011-06-15 03:40:52 <jgarzik>   theymos: then let's not have -any- forum on bitcoin.org
2011-06-15 03:41:11 <jgarzik>   theymos: ceasing use of bitcoin.org would be fine
2011-06-15 03:41:12 <genewitch>   jgarzik: the wiki can link to forums for bitcoin users
2011-06-15 03:41:53 <jgarzik>   theymos: you cannot have it both ways.   if you truly want "no official websites" then let's stop using bitcoin.org altogether.
2011-06-15 03:41:56 <genewitch>   hey you guys remember webrings? we should bring that back.
2011-06-15 03:42:06 <thallium205>   hahaha
2011-06-15 03:42:38 <theymos>   Why is bitcoin.org necessarily official? It's not linked anywhere in the program. No development takes place there. No developers own it.
2011-06-15 03:42:54 <cacheson>   genewitch: for stuff like "my super-awesome geocities bitcoin homepage"?  ;)
2011-06-15 03:43:08 <gjs278>   I'm highly opposed to how crappy bitcoin.org is
2011-06-15 03:43:09 <genewitch>   cacheson: exactly
2011-06-15 03:43:12 <mrb_>   one more thing to consider is that using different domains makes it (a bit) harder for a government to go through the redtape to block access to all domains
2011-06-15 03:43:14 <gjs278>   I was very vocal about this like two months ago
2011-06-15 03:43:25 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: bitcoin.org doesn't have any claim of "official" IMO
2011-06-15 03:43:39 <theymos>   Ha! There's one person who agrees with me. :)
2011-06-15 03:43:40 <mrb_>   (thinking of The Great Firewall and other repressive countries)
2011-06-15 03:43:42 <luke-jr>   theymos: the program isn't official either
2011-06-15 03:43:42 <gjs278>   it's the title of our channel
2011-06-15 03:43:48 <gjs278>   if it's not official take it out
2011-06-15 03:43:49 <cacheson>   theymos: eh, bitcoin.org is a decent place for the mainline client
2011-06-15 03:43:59 <cacheson>   theymos: it's like getting openoffice from openoffice.org, etc.
2011-06-15 03:44:10 <genewitch>   luke-jr: maybe not "officially" if you'll pardon me for a second here but as mentioned when someone mentions bitcoin in the media it references bitcoin.org, hence it becomes the defacto official server.
2011-06-15 03:44:12 <luke-jr>   IMO, bitcoin.org should be like weusecoins.com
2011-06-15 03:44:26 <jgarzik>   should be... but isn't
2011-06-15 03:44:37 <theymos>   luke-jr: That's exactly my position.
2011-06-15 03:44:40 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: I would be fine with that
2011-06-15 03:44:48 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: as long as the forums aren't on there
2011-06-15 03:45:09 <luke-jr>   if you guys don't think a forum is appropriate, I'd be welcome to have something on bitgit.org (or whatever TLD I ended up with)
2011-06-15 03:45:10 <thallium205>   bittorrent is highly decentralized, but there still exists bittorrent.com (and it has community forums)
2011-06-15 03:45:21 <jgarzik>   there is not a single forum linked on weusecoins.com
2011-06-15 03:45:22 <genewitch>   can't the devs and powerusers switch to a bugzilla/regular forum format and let the community host the user forums?
2011-06-15 03:45:24 <gjs278>   bittorrent.com is nowhere near as official as bitcoin.org tries to be
2011-06-15 03:45:36 <luke-jr>   which I had planned to be a hosting site for Bitcoin-related projects (incl bug tracker, git, etc)
2011-06-15 03:45:39 <gjs278>   but that's due to there being hundreds of clients
2011-06-15 03:46:02 <luke-jr>   gjs278: forums in general are irregular
2011-06-15 03:46:10 <gjs278>   they are
2011-06-15 03:46:47 <genewitch>   basically what i am hearing here is that we wish there were an opensource way for people to collaborate and ask questions on the internet semi anonymously?
2011-06-15 03:46:50 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: so you actively support illegal activity?
2011-06-15 03:46:51 <gjs278>   if bitcoin.org is the officlal website, it should be in a public repo the same as the "official client"
2011-06-15 03:46:58 <genewitch>   Where nodes could come on and drop off and not really affect the whole?
2011-06-15 03:47:01 <genewitch>   I think this exists.
2011-06-15 03:47:12 <genewitch>   hold on i have to google the name
2011-06-15 03:47:13 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: what? no
2011-06-15 03:47:25 <theymos>   I support some types of illegal activity. Free trade, for example.
2011-06-15 03:47:26 <luke-jr>   gjs278: there is no official
2011-06-15 03:47:40 <gjs278>   bitcoin.org is in our title, we give the impression away that it is official
2011-06-15 03:47:47 <genewitch>   oh i found it! It's called IRC!
2011-06-15 03:47:53 <theymos>   Why is bitcoin.it not official?
2011-06-15 03:48:05 <genewitch>   theymos: cause who's ever heard of .it
2011-06-15 03:48:05 <luke-jr>   gjs278: this channel isn't official either. there is no official, or Bitcoin becomes the Fed
2011-06-15 03:48:09 <gjs278>   the sourceforge page should be linked here, not bitcoin.org
2011-06-15 03:48:17 <jgarzik>   um, satoshi did not register bitcoin.it.  the press does not link to bitcoin.it.
2011-06-15 03:48:29 <jgarzik>   ...as "official bitcoin website"
2011-06-15 03:48:33 <genewitch>   defacto "official" the media have to link somewhere
2011-06-15 03:48:57 <genewitch>   jgarzik: you mean "just google it" isn't a valid way to get users to the community?
2011-06-15 03:50:12 <luke-jr>   I propose Bitcoin.org be a general repository of links to community resources, laid out for newbies :P
2011-06-15 03:50:32 <luke-jr>   ie, download page links to most popular client at the time
2011-06-15 03:50:35 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: sounds great
2011-06-15 03:50:37 <luke-jr>   maybe to be voted in every year
2011-06-15 03:50:38 <genewitch>   luke-jr: can it have animated balls and marquees?
2011-06-15 03:50:41 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: like weusecoins.com...
2011-06-15 03:50:41 <luke-jr>   or month, if it gets competitive
2011-06-15 03:50:59 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: yeah, maybe bitcoin.org should just forward there :P
2011-06-15 03:51:00 <gjs278>   it's all up to whoever owns the site to do that
2011-06-15 03:51:10 <luke-jr>   sirius-m does IIRC
2011-06-15 03:51:24 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: RE illegal activity:  people are actively soliticing illegal activity on the forums.  "bitcoin.org as official website" passes the layperson's obviousness test, and that's a major problem.  bitcoinj might end due to that, for example.
2011-06-15 03:51:29 <jgarzik>   it's become a serious problem
2011-06-15 03:51:46 <genewitch>   jgarzik: more active policing
2011-06-15 03:51:49 <jgarzik>   trying to convince businesses to accept bitcoins under those conditions is... difficult
2011-06-15 03:51:50 <genewitch>   jgarzik: pay in BTC
2011-06-15 03:51:55 <jgarzik>   genewitch: theymos is the police
2011-06-15 03:52:05 <jgarzik>   genewitch: centralized administrator by fiat
2011-06-15 03:52:09 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: ok, good reason to (re)move the fourms from bitcoin.org :p
2011-06-15 03:52:13 <genewitch>   he needs to deputize peopl
2011-06-15 03:52:16 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: yes
2011-06-15 03:52:29 <gjs278>   good reason to not use bitcoin.org because one guy has complete control over it
2011-06-15 03:52:31 <jgarzik>   genewitch: anybody who tries to delete signs of illegal activity has their mod powers yanked
2011-06-15 03:52:44 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: srsly?
2011-06-15 03:52:45 <jgarzik>   gjs278: unfortunately we cannot tell the press nor google that
2011-06-15 03:52:49 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: yes
2011-06-15 03:52:52 <luke-jr>   :o
2011-06-15 03:52:59 <genewitch>   businesses don't know how to use BTC. also the "it's used for illict activity" is a silly excuse. Every American $20 has more cocaine on it than ink.
2011-06-15 03:53:03 <gjs278>   yeah it is a little late now
2011-06-15 03:53:07 <genewitch>   er don't know how to use forums*
2011-06-15 03:53:09 <theymos>   That's not true at all. I've never removed a moderator. And I'm not the only administrator: Gavin was the one who made me an admin.
2011-06-15 03:53:16 <luke-jr>   my worthless vote goes to moving forums off bitcoin.org, and censoring them heavily
2011-06-15 03:53:30 <jgarzik>   theymos: blatant lie.  you removed my mod powers.
2011-06-15 03:53:31 <luke-jr>   and splitting the subforums more
2011-06-15 03:53:37 <luke-jr>   …
2011-06-15 03:53:40 <gjs278>   force everyone to gpg auth to forum post
2011-06-15 03:53:53 <genewitch>   gjs278: screw that gpg is annoying
2011-06-15 03:53:54 <theymos>   That modship was only temporary. I said it at the time.
2011-06-15 03:53:58 <gjs278>   exactly
2011-06-15 03:53:59 <jgarzik>   uh huh
2011-06-15 03:54:02 <luke-jr>   jgarzik: he did say it was for 24 hours..
2011-06-15 03:54:11 <jgarzik>   luke-jr: it lasted < 60 minutes
2011-06-15 03:54:15 <luke-jr>   O.o
2011-06-15 03:54:31 <gjs278>   I would trust the cbs interview man to fairly moderate the bitcoin.org forums
2011-06-15 03:54:36 <luke-jr>   well, I think everyone agrees forums shouldn't be on bitcoin.org at least? XD
2011-06-15 03:54:42 <jgarzik>   theymos: will you make me moderator again, and permit me to delete posts encouraging illegal activity?
2011-06-15 03:54:53 <gjs278>   ;;ident jgarzik
2011-06-15 03:54:54 <gribble>   Nick 'jgarzik', with hostmask 'jgarzik!~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik', is not identified.
2011-06-15 03:54:55 <cacheson>   luke-jr: theymos doesn't, hence the argument
2011-06-15 03:55:11 <theymos>   No. It is the policy of the forum to allow such discussions. Sirius owns the server, so he can change the policy if he's worried about legal action.
2011-06-15 03:55:11 <gjs278>   I'm not convinced this is the real jgarzik, don't mod him yet
2011-06-15 03:55:48 <genewitch>   i know how to tell
2011-06-15 03:56:02 <genewitch>   jgarzik: pushpoold is not updating my hashrate in the database, what up with that
2011-06-15 03:56:19 <jgarzik>   ;;ident
2011-06-15 03:56:19 <gribble>   You are identified as user jgarzik, with GPG key id DA1DC20F2DBF0CA8, and key fingerprint 60B00235B3355D84BF2A4E35DA1DC20F2DBF0CA8.
2011-06-15 03:56:22 <jgarzik>   Now I'm me :)
2011-06-15 03:56:26 <gjs278>   mod this man
2011-06-15 03:56:39 <luke-jr>   sounds like nothing will get accomplished without sirius-m in the discussion
2011-06-15 03:57:32 <genewitch>   well, i mean there are ways of preventing users from accessing something
2011-06-15 03:57:53 <luke-jr>   genewitch: you're not implying we DDoS the forums I hope? :/
2011-06-15 03:57:58 <genewitch>   no never
2011-06-15 03:58:10 <genewitch>   i meant ask nicely
2011-06-15 03:58:42 <jgarzik>   official website bitcoin.org points to the forums on forums.bitcoin.org.  new users are essentially automatically directed there.
2011-06-15 03:59:01 <theymos>   I'd be fine with removing the link.
2011-06-15 03:59:40 <jgarzik>   it needs to move away from the satoshi's domain
2011-06-15 03:59:58 <genewitch>   jgarzik: well, i mean, a comprimise sounds good for this instant
2011-06-15 04:00:15 <genewitch>   we might see less influx of complete idiots if there's no link on the quote official unquote page
2011-06-15 04:00:19 <luke-jr>   yep, nothing is going to change significant without sirius-m
2011-06-15 04:00:38 <jgarzik>   hooray for centralized control of a decentralized project...
2011-06-15 04:01:32 <genewitch>   jgarzik: there should be an official wiki, with a committe
2011-06-15 04:01:35 <jgarzik>   the forums have changed hostnames before, and it was not a big deal
2011-06-15 04:01:42 <jgarzik>   genewitch: hehe
2011-06-15 04:02:08 <genewitch>   well i mean that's how most FOSS projects are run, commitee, LINUX "penguin pee" TORVALDS excepted, of course.
2011-06-15 04:02:16 <theymos>   Centralization is an effective management technique as long as there are many centralized organizations to compete.
2011-06-15 04:03:01 <cacheson>   theymos: right, so splitting the forums off from bitcoin.org furthers that
2011-06-15 04:03:27 <cacheson>   theymos: makes the forums and the development stuff into two visibly separate organizations
2011-06-15 04:03:46 <jgarzik>   indeed
2011-06-15 04:03:58 <cacheson>   that way you can let people talk about what they want to on the forums without the developers getting (as much) flak about it
2011-06-15 04:04:24 <jgarzik>   being under "bitcoin.org" the domain that satoshi created, and that search engines and press link to, obviously heavily favors "bitcoin.org" over any other domain
2011-06-15 04:04:44 <genewitch>   jgarzik: bitcoin.blogspot.com is a close second though
2011-06-15 04:04:45 <luke-jr>   cacheson: "development staff" is too vague too
2011-06-15 04:05:00 <luke-jr>   bitcoin.org shouldn't be biased to any one project
2011-06-15 04:05:25 <luke-jr>   besides a "default" by popularity
2011-06-15 04:05:28 <cacheson>   luke-jr: I don't see anything terribly wrong with it being associated with the mainline client
2011-06-15 04:05:45 <luke-jr>   cacheson: because there's multiple mainline clients
2011-06-15 04:05:53 <genewitch>   luke-jr: who gets to decide what goes on the main page though? group editing of a website... hey we can patent that and call it something cool
2011-06-15 04:05:56 <genewitch>   like
2011-06-15 04:05:57 <cacheson>   luke-jr: uh... no?
2011-06-15 04:06:00 <genewitch>   wiky
2011-06-15 04:06:14 <genewitch>   yeah wiky, and we can make an encyclopedia
2011-06-15 04:06:41 <luke-jr>   genewitch: popular vote
2011-06-15 04:06:54 <genewitch>   luke-jr: it works so well for prom king
2011-06-15 04:06:57 <cacheson>   this is just like bittorrent, openoffice, etc.
2011-06-15 04:07:02 <luke-jr>   cacheson: no
2011-06-15 04:07:10 <jgarzik>   I'll even purchase the domain (bitcointalk.org?) for 10 years, register w/ privacy enhanced domain registrar, and transfer it to theymos  or whomever wants it


In these logs "TD" is Mike Hearn, none of the others strike me as people posters here probably know under other names.

Also see the Mailing list discussion (https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2011-July/000192.html) at the time. (John Smith is Wladimir)

From today's perspective where Bitcoin itself appears to be safe in most of the world and where not much too shocking goes happens on the forums this all might seem like an over-reaction.

But back then it was far from crystal clear that Bitcoin itself was legal in jurisdictions where many of us were, and there was some scarry noises from the US goverment-- every ounce of additional negative attention was an additional threat that people who already felt exposed working on Bitcoin didn't want to deal with.

The forums themselves were a lot more wild and crazy then they are today-- from the infamous incident of one well known party offering to sell nudes of their 16-year-old sister, to other things that at least sounded like outright human trafficking. Some of the crazier stuff was almost certantly fake, but it still showed up and many people weren't sure how real any of it was.

Bitcoin was this crazy new thing and just seemed pregnant with possibilities: Could it really be that underage stripper assisan slaves could be purchased anonymously for a mere few-thousand Bitcoin with the press of a button or is that just some sick fantasy?  Well, for all of us decentetralized digital money was just a fantasy a few years before.  It was impossible to be excited about the potential without being aware that there were also potential downsides.

As usual, Theymos was pretty prescient ... with his remarks about the importance of avoiding any site as being an official anything.

I think it all worked out okay.

Edit: I found an earlier conversation that gave more context which I was a part of, so I tagged that on the top-- and now it no longer looks like I didn't agree with the move. :)

For transparency sake, since I wasn't a part of that particular discussion, at least in public-- it might look like I didn't agree with the move, but I did.

See, for example, this later discussion:

2011-06-28 18:00:33 <ius>   What's moving the forums going to help by the way? Afraid you'll end up with the same clutter soon enough. Policies, policies, or something
2011-06-28 18:00:57 <luke-jr>   ius: forum mod refuses to censor illegal activity
2011-06-28 18:01:20 <jgarzik>   ius: well one goal is to get forum off of *.bitcoin.org, to make it "less official", in part due to reasons luke-jr just stated
2011-06-28 18:01:30 <jgarzik>   ius: and de-link from front page, hopefully
2011-06-28 18:01:31 <gmaxwell>   Not just 'refuses to censor illegal activity' but won't even make people be subtle about it.
2011-06-28 18:02:05 <gmaxwell>   Even if you don't care about illegality, it's tacky.


Someone should remind me sometime and I'll write about when I was offered stewardship of the bitcoin.org domain and how glad I am I didn't accept it. :)

Thank you. I love to read all these old time stories.

Another interesting fact maybe not so forum related was that after the 10 000 bitcoin pizza Laszlo (http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/pizza/) bough some more pizza but using the Lightning network (http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/lightning-pizza/) :)

It'll be interesting to know what users reflections are on moving now that its been done.

Seems like it was already decided that it was going to be called Bitcointalk.org before it was registered? Or was jgarzik the one to suggest that domain?

:) That makes me nostalgic for when I was quite that naïvely revolutionary. The forum was pretty crazy back then...



He came up with it.

I realized I missed the earlier part of the discussion. If you read the logs earlier and found them interesting, go back to the top!

Theymos, thanks for the example-- I felt a little uneasy about being specific about some of the more crazy stuff that was posted early on, your example using Ross' (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/the-incredibly-simple-story-of-how-the-govt-googled-ross-ulbricht/) announcement of silk road is a great example. :P

Haha less than a 2 hour stint as a global Mod. Interesting to know that the forum and Bitcoin have been declared dead for nearly the same amount of time.
What can I say I applaud the commitment you "old timers" have put into this space.

I just can agree with others in here , realy nice and to read the conversation .

Some history again that not much today knows , gmaxwell thanks for the Information and the Thread.

Should be quoted or posted in some History Threads we have here on the Forum.

I registered here a couple weeks after that conversation. Vaguely remember checking out the forums a month or two prior on the old domain.

Good times. I miss the early(er) days.

Do we have any archive or something of the forum when it was running as bitcoin.org/smf/ or forums.bitcoin.org?

I only know about these:

https://bitcointalk.org/oldSiteFiles/
https://bitcointalk.org/first_topics/


BitcoinTalk’s first posts and some old files.

You're on it. Nothing was changed except the URL/domain.

Yes there are archives of forum when it was in the older domain. But it's the same forum as it is used to be now but with less boards like when you see the oldest archive of the bitcoin.org/smf domain, there were only 2 boards present (Bitcoin Discussion and Technical Support) boards.

https://web.archive.org/web/20091215005450/http://bitcointalk.org/

If someone is not willing to visit the link posted above, here is a pic of that :

https://i.imgur.com/c7RzoXc.jpg

Another Interesting fact is gavin was the administrator and theymos was a global moderator at the time when satoshi left and there was a feature like posts per day near your total post count in your profile and something like Respect was present.

https://i.imgur.com/0GFbY63.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/xRCghWR.jpg

@theymos What is Respect BTW  ???

It was an SMF mod used here for only a short time as an experiment. IIRC, you could upvote/downvote users, but there were no effective limits/controls, so it was kind of meaningless.

I tried opening the contents of the forum on May 03, 2014 through web.archieve.org

And I found this:
https://i.imgur.com/7LWiNs2.png
http://web.archive.org/web/20140503031758/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56400.0

The scammer tag. Is this tag the first trust system in this forum?

---

I like theymos signature.  ;D

You dodged a bullet there.

I like the separated setup. It allows the bitcoin.org domain to be somewhat more neutral and the bitcointalk domain to promote certain values and opinions that if were on the bitcoin.org domain might be exerting too much control over Bitcoin.

Thanks for this piece of history. It's nice to have the background on how things came to be with bitcointalk. Maybe it's just me, but bitcointalk continues to give an eerie vibe of discovery with its obscurity still... The unorthodox design, the technobabble that members talk about... Everything from top to bottom with this forum, at least to me, still looks and feels geeky to me.

One thing about going over these old logs which I didn't recall was the claim "bitcoinj might end", which I don't have more more context for, or at least don't remember the context for. Clearly Mike Hearn was pretty cross about the illegal activities discussion.


I believe BCT has an order of magnitude more active posters and posts than the Bitcoin subreddit or any other single bitcoin-related venue. It's not hyper-engineered to capture and spoon-feed a massive passive reader base like reddit or twitter.


Hm? The design is more or less that of most other SMF style forums, it's not uncommon.

I don't see any technobabble (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=57253.msg682056#msg682056) here!

I didn't know EFF refused a Bitcoin donation for tax reasons, TIL.

These IRC conversations also show why the forum had the newbie jail for a while. It wouldn't be until 2013 when the forum faced another huge influx of new users.

Basically there were a lot of Bitcoin donations-- thousands of Bitcoin-- sent to the EFF and then they decided they didn't want them, and they handed them over to Gavin.

I think it's really good to learn about history from primary material like these logs-- it wipes away a lot of the bullshit hero worship and false certainty, like the idea that great leaders usually have any freeking clue what they're doing, that shows up in more derivative historical work.  But it has limitations: you're stuck with the misconceptions that existed at the time :)

My recollection is that their reasoning was more complicated than "tax reasons"-- essentially they were concerned that if they accepted Bitcoin they'd have a conflict of interest that might impede their ability to defend Bitcoin in the courts.  E.g. if any use of Bitcoin was criminal then the EFF might have been a defendant in anti-bitcoin litigation.  My understanding is that they were also getting flak from some of their donors for 'endorsing a scam'.

Here is EFF's blog post https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/eff-and-bitcoin ... it seems to backup my recollection.

I remember the old forum from my days of noobness. It wasn't until 2013 when it was clear that BFL had really fucked me over that I decided to join the forum and vent about my Jalapenos and SCs that never arrived.

Funny how I never got to the complaining part as I got caried away when BTC hit $1k for the first time. Almost seemed like it happened faster than the 2017/18 peak. In fact, it did.

That was Fun.. Love the vibe..Here is the Sequence of Events if you want a shorter version. I highlighted some of the moments i found interesting:

1. Maxwell expressing concern over trolls in old forum


2. Cocern over Devs facing legal uncertainty (Guilt by association)

3. Jeff asks Theymos about new domain

4. Jeff and Theymos argue whats official

5.ROFL @ That was only temporary
;D

6. Jeff asks Theymos to move the "illegal activity" posts. Theymos sticks to the policy.

7. Theymos warms up to the idea with his  Centralization vs Decetaralization remark.

Thanks for this, awesome, I included a link in the Bitcoin Prehistory thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5126554.msg53158866#msg53158866 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5126554.msg53158866#msg53158866)

Wow. thanks for posting this. I realized this conversation started mere day before i registered here  [or there actually] ;D

bitcoin have come a long way since then. what a journey

Some cool theymos quotes..


Not so revolutionary anymore eh?
That post would be against the rules now..

Hello,

Thank you for this very interesting story that tells us more about the history of the forum :)

A question comes to me, where do these messages actually come from ?

All that text is from the #bitcoin-dev IRC channel on freenode, which has been the most active discussion venue for Bitcoin development since Satoshi stopped participating (well, now in #bitcoin-core-dev due to other interesting history).

It used to have public logs all over the internet as matter of channel policy: We considered the public logs important for openness and transparency, so while other bitcoin channels forbid public logs and preferred banning over quieting disruptive users,  #bitcoin-dev embraced public logs and strongly preferred quieting to bans.  If not for the public logs I would have consistently pushed that all important discussions get moved to the mailing lists.

Unfortunately all the public logs are offline now and it's not entirely clear to me why. I've found it particularly concerning because the loss of these logs is extraordinarily helpful for people who are dishonestly trying to rewrite the political history of Bitcoin. (e.g. they claim stuff like I only started participating in Bitcoin in 2014 or 2015 or that everyone always agreed that the blocksize limit was temporary and would be completely eliminated-- stuff that the discussion shows isn't just wrong, but is an absurd opposite of the truth).

I've been working on unifying logs from a number of people to recover a complete set (any given person has holes in their logs because of periods where they were offline...).

Okay, it's really interesting, you did a great job !

But suddenly, since it was public discussions, is it not possible to find them on sites such archive.org (https://archive.org/) ?

Do you still have the links of these discussions ( Even if they are dead ) ?

Errr no, it didn't work like that.
You have to remember that was a time when they took screenshots with Polaroid cameras.

Yes, it's possible, but difficult.

And there is so much discussion that without the ability to search text it's impossible to find anything.

But here you go:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140703182335/http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2011/06/11#l1307836061

https://web.archive.org/web/20140703182232/http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2011/06/12

The rewriting is going on full swing and you are a favorite target for the gang when it comes to the whole Old devs VS Core devs drama. Nobody has the time and the willingness to go through the actual history. What is especially disappointing in this regard is that r/bitcoin has become a wall of memes and stupid arguments.
Any newcomer would find r/btc to be much more "informative". It doesn't matter if their narrative is wrong. These public logs that you mention can be a treasure trove to solidify the truths of the matter. We should be doing this in mission mode. I am sure a lot of us would be interested in helping you out.

Regards

Found this thread from another one but I think it's a good place to ask this question.
There were times when different "Satoshi Nakamoto" claimers were investigated and arrested, one happened in Germany, another one in Australia and the story goes on. Since it's obvious that satoshi created the forum, was posting here, gave access on forum to other members, etc, because of these reasons, was there ever an attempt of investigation on Theymos, Cyrus and other old and famous bitcointalk members?

Arrested?
Please do elaborate..

Hopefully this dude is a time traveler .... and meant the arrest of Craig Wright.

Otherwise, just like you, I would like to receive clarifications, since I do not remember such a precedent.  ::)

Craig Wright - Australia
Jorg Molt - Germany (2021)

Wish I was time traveler  :-\

They all are Faketoshi and the one arrested in Germany was trying to fool people under Bitcoin pension project and have scam them of $2.1 million and was charged under fraudulent case.Those who claims to be founder of bitcoin have no valid proofs for it and Craig Wright tops the list of fake ones.

Sadly, this is not what you think. According to what I could research, he is referring to Jorg Jolt being arrested (https://coinfomania.com/german-police-arrest-fake-satoshi-for-btc-fraud/) in Germany for claiming to have a 250k btc wallet, and for starting an "investment" fund that would use 60% of the proceeds to purchase mining equipment. This was something that happened in 2019.

It does not appear that CSW was arrested as part of this investigation.

You forgot sirius. He was the Bitcointalk administrator before theymos. Theymos made his way up the ladder to get to where he is now. He was a Global Moderator and then he became an admin when he was needed.


You might also want to read this interesting interview with sirius. (https://forum.bitcoin.com/ama-ask-me-anything/i-m-martti-malmi-early-bitcoin-developer-and-the-original-founder-of-the-bitcointalk-org-forums-ama-t2770.html)
Satoshi knew how to cover his tracks, so even if one of these guys is satoshi, they would know how to cover theirs as well.

Yes they are doing quite well in covering their tracks by exposing them in public to gain some popularity to scam some fools who believe in their shit talks.

I read some of those comments and I think I'm starting to believe that sirius is a satoshi because satoshi is known as the founder of bitcointalk.org. In the post, Sirius admits that he is the founder of bitcointalk but this is really confusing. satoshi was pretty good at hiding until recently, but people have always been curious about who he really is in real life and his activeness on the forum to this day. I also want to know do you believe Sirius is Satoshi?  ;D

Sirius created Bitcointalk.org, but that's not the original forum. It's not the forum that satoshi created. Satoshi's forum was hosted on bitcoin.org. After that it was moved to forum.bitcoin.org I think. Bitcointalk.org is the third board and the one we use today. Unless there were more in between that I forgot about. To complicate the issue even more, sirius isn't the person who came up with the name "Bitcointalk". Jeff Garzik did. Theymos mentions that in one of the quotes I shared in my previous reply.