Bitcoin Forum

"Official site offering documentation, forums and the open source client software which permits to send and receive bitcoins."  - Site Description showing up on Google.

"Bitcoin.org is not an official website. Just like nobody owns the email technology, nobody owns the Bitcoin network. As such, nobody can speak with authority in the name of Bitcoin."
on page https://bitcoin.org/en/about-us

Most users will see the description that appears in Google and will never read the disclaimer on the other page.

Most people won't care. We know that it's not official and is nor representative of us.

I think almost everyone in bitcoin world knows that It's not official website.

Further We might see another domain with something like bitcoin.tk .cc claiming official site but it won't matter.

Most people won't know.  Not sure what you mean by "us" since Bitcoin is open source and decentralized anyone can use it.

The site decides which wallets and services get listed.  the site is directed at new users who don't know about Bitcoin.  

On their site as you shown in op, https://bitcoin.org/en/about-us. They say, "Bitcoin.org is not an official website. "

I don't think, " "Official site offering documentation, forums and the open source client software which permits to send and receive bitcoins."  - Site Description showing up on Google.", is them saying they own Bitcoin, but rather that Bitcoin.org is the main site representing bitcoin and/or the one that's safe to download the bitcoin wallets and such. That's helpful since there is a ton of scams going on with Bitcoin, remember that fake blockchain.info phishing site a while back?

I thought the site was the main site for the Github project but now you say it is morphed into the main site for all of Bitcoin?  When did that change?  Are you saying this decentralized thing is too complicated and it is much easier to turn things over to an "official" web site that decides which services and wallets get listed? 

No. I'm saying that it's best to have a "main" site to get all your updates/wallets/etc about Bitcoin.

Did you not see the blockchain.info scam that was happening on google a while ago, where a phishing site was impersonating blockchain? Yea, and there are tons of other scam sites that pretend to be web wallets, etc etc.

All I'm saying is that having bitcoin.org as the "main" site for Bitcoin, is good, especially for newbies, or else they'll all fall into the traps of the scammers.

Scammers?  You mean like the businesses that sported a Bitcoin Foundation logo like Mt. Gox and Inputs.io?  Newbies should not be mislead into thinking Foundation-controlled we sites (or Theymos-controlled wen sites) are official so they do not fall for the things that get posted there.

I had posted an issue on Github.  they claimed they made some kind of fix but it will take awhile for it to complete but they closed the issue already before it was fixed with Google.  It turns out this came up a couple years ago.  https://bitcointa.lk/threads/why-is-bitcoin-org-claiming-to-be-the-official-site-of-bitcoin.71845/

Most users will learn that google is broken and will misslead you if you dont double check. Google add scams in the past, broken search results now.

Remember google is not your friend.

btw your title looks missleading as your text states that google lists the site as official not the site itself

Doesn't matter what the website claimed.

But bitcointalk seems to be getting quiet lately and many long time members gone for some reasons.

I guess it is still unclear how it got in there.  It looks like it has been that way for a couple years and nobody did anything to change it.  the description is not in DMOZ or Yahoo directory so it is still unclear.  Google is not my friend and neither is Theymos or the Foundation so I don't trust either site completely.   

i think the point is that anything uploaded to bitcoin.org has atleast been tried and tested to not be scamware.

EG id only trust to get bitcoin-core.exe updates from there, and not dodgycopywebsites.com/fulloftrojans

Nothing is uploaded to Bitcoin.org.  They provide links to various wallet services and there is no standard testing method or standard method of accepting/rejecting something.  It is decided by a small group and since I can't see how the decisions are made I don't always trust the decisions.

People rarely do very much research when they are just getting started anyway. Without any kind of "official" (regardless if it can actually be "official") then people will likely end up using some kind of scam wallet (like inputs but not as widely known of a scam).

How about all the users who trusted the Bitcoin Foundation logos on all those sites where their funds were lost?  If the Foundation logo appeared on a web site it was highly likely the customers would lose their funds.  That is the "brand" of the current Foundation.  Maybe in the future the principles' of the Foundation won't want other wallets/services posted so they just say it is defective to prevent them from being listed?  Don't you think that is a distinct possibility?

The Chairman of the Foundation was aalso ccused of all sorts of things in the recent bankruptcy trial ranging from transferring $millions in Bitcoin hours before filing bankruptcy to his legal team disrupting the court proceedings by making noises in the court while the other party was presenting their case.  Now you want users to go to a web site supported by them so they don't get ripped off?  Some of the same people who run this site are involved with control of that site as well.  You can trust who you want but I don't trust any of those people.

The fact is they are not "official" and they don't represent anyone except themselves.

You can claim that the Earth is flat. That doesn't make it true.

If you are talking about Alydian the court papers are all online where Barry Silbert's company, Bitvesment Partners, caught the transfer of the Bitcoins and it was the judge that scolded the legal team for making noises.  I tried to purchase the mining equipment and I said I wanted it delivered.  They went into court and said the potential bidders wanted the equipment left in place.

http://cointext.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/alydiancomplaint.pdf

The rest of the court docs are here:

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/unc1p5dn/washington-western-bankruptcy-court/cli-holdings-inc/

A few entries pulled from the articled linked below:

Document 113-1, Page 24: "THE COURT: So that concerns me even more. Now what you’re saying is the debtor agreed to pay significant incentive compensation to employees of an insider without any court approval at all."

Document 113-1, Page 39: "But if you're asking me am I satisfied with the credibility of Mr. Vessenes? No, I am not."

Document 113-1, Page 41: "THE COURT: I mean, my preference would certainly be that CoinLab shouldn't be paid anything except by a motion and order of the Court, or somebody needs to be looking at the invoices. Because this is a lot of money being transferred to what is clearly an insider."

Document 113-1, Page 42: "THE COURT: I don’t know how legitimate these expenses really are because what I see is a debtor that has absolutely zero existence, zero — the debtor is nothing. The debtor has — doesn’t have — I can’t tell whether the debtor has the assets. Mr. Stehlik raised an issue about who owns the — you know, who owns the technology. I don’t know what it takes to prove what the debtor owns. The debtor has no employees. The debtor has no office. The debtor has nothing. And so I want to make sure that when we do this worldwide advertising we are not misrepresenting to the world what we have to sell, because the integrity of the bankruptcy process is at stake."

Document 113-1, Page 58: "THE COURT: I guess I don’t understand how the mining works such that when the November monthly report was filed on December 17th, it showed no revenue, and it wasn’t until the day after Mr. Vessenes’s deposition that it was amended to show $1.8 million."

Document 113-2, Page 21: "So, Your Honor, it’s very simple. This is a highly profitable enterprise. It doesn’t need this bankruptcy. It has no business filing a bankruptcy petition, and the sale motion that is a big piece of this puzzle should be denied."

Document 113-2, Page 26: "There were payments to insiders two days before, and as of the date — only a couple of hours before the bankruptcy petition was filed, the debtor transferred as of today’s value over $12 million worth of bitcoins. The debtor repeatedly lied about it in his schedules, on Schedule 3B at the 341 meeting of creditors, and only amended SOFA No. 3 the day after the Rule 2004 exam, during which time it was confronted with evidence that these payments were actually made immediately before the bankruptcy petition. We have multiple other misstatements in the schedules, including Schedule D, which states that the debtor had no bitcoins as of the date of the filing of the petition."

Document 113-2, Page 29: "THE COURT: Okay, Ms. Glynn Levin, I can tell you, because I sit up here, that Ms. Simonyan didn’t make any noises or anything like that when she heard you say things that she didn’t like, so you need to give her the same respect."

Document 113-2, Page 33: "First of all, as the Court can see, many of these emails are gibberish. There are characters that are completely unreadable. Some of the font sizes are so small that it’s impossible to even read the parts that are in actual English."

Document 113-2, Page 65: "Post-petition contracts. I suppose the debtor could argue this was in the ordinary course of business, but I’m going to say it’s not. A contract signed between the debtor and a related entity which is signed by the person that I am counting on to be in charge of the debtor in possession, Mr. Vessenes, when he signs with both hats on, I have to have all of my systems on high alert."


some articles

http://two-bit-idiot.tumblr.com/post/79487498877/peter-vessenes-and-the-curious-bankruptcy-case-of

http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/20140212/do-you-trust-the-bitcoin-foundation/

I think the core developers sorted the issue with their replies on the reddit post.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2js78h/bitcoinorg_now_claiming_to_be_the_official_site/

A couple Foundation employees played tag team to try to smooth things over in reddit.  Prior to this the education committee claimed their content was developed in a "decentralized" manner which they also agreed to change once I complained.  Plus there were those times when they claimed they represent all Bitcoin users and they said they would change their tune and state they only represent their users. 

In any case the latest claim here is that the info came from Google.  They updated the site description but it is not changed in Google yet so it is not yet resolved even though they closed the issue.

Thanks for this. I was thinking that "Ok cool bitcoin has now an official website"

They probably have good intentions.  If they wanted to make a quick buck they would just sell the domain

If you ask me they bought the domain to make some slow buck.

as i see this, any info on bitcoin is positive if it is true. People will use websites where they wil gain whatever they search. If one website plan to scam people will not last that long. Yes there will be some victims, but there wil not be endless victims.

NOTHING???????

https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.9.3/bitcoin-0.9.3-win64-setup.exe

hmmmmm..........
i guess you can get the official bitcoin-core exe FROM THE SITE

also note that bitcoin.org is NOT the bitcoin foundation. bitcoin.org existed far before the bitcoin foundation, it is managed by gavin andressen and the community of developers. and yes gavin and a few others are are paid by the bitcoin foundation but also remember that gavin and the developers are smart enough to have his own mind and care more about bitcoin, than the bad acts of those fiat loving, tax dodgers of the foundation.

so dont confuse bitcoin.org with the foundation

They do not offer downloads of third party wallet programs at bitcoin.org like you claimed.  If what you say is true then the site is both managed and supported by a Bitcoin Foundation employee and they dictate the content.  "community of developers" is another one of those meaningless terms people like to say when they are trying to hide or misrepresent the actual process.  The site is run by a few insiders who attack people who complain.  I saw what they did to andreas Antonopoulos on there and he eventually left the Foundation. 

As for your statement:  "remember that gavin and the developers are smart enough to have his own mind and care more about bitcoin, than the bad acts of those fiat loving, tax dodgers of the foundation."  That is just another meaningless fanboy comment.  if they are so smart then they should be smart enough to distance themselves from people like Vessenes and they should not have supported things like Mt. Gox and Inputs.io.  The other point that you miss is that theymos is also involved in bitcoin.org.  He is known for running a site with scam after scam after scam right here.

Face facts, you treat Bitcoin like a religion and you can't see reality.   That fact is used to rip people off.  I remember when I started complaining about Mt. Gox.  In early 2013 I started saying that Mt. Gox did not know what they were doing and I used to complain to the Foundation.  My complaints were disregarded and the fanboys said how much Mt. Gox was doing for Bitcoin and I was  "troll."  In early 2013 I said that in 18 months that all the major players in the Foundation would be gone like Mt. Gox, Coinlab, and Bitinstant.  I was wrong in that I thought Theymos would be prosecuted by now.  if Gavin was so smart why didn't he work to remove the Bitcoin Foundation logos from Mt. Gox and Inputs.io?

You confuse being able to develop software with running a Foundation or a business.  Those are completely different things and just because someone writes some code does not mean they know anything else.  Look at Vitalik Buterin.  He can code but he also claims that 90% of the people in the world do no work and that in the future that number will rise to 99% so almost no one will have to work.  I guess he got that from watching that movie "Time Machine" but I am certainly am not going to listen that nonsense just because he can write code.

The only official site is created by the main developer or satoshi nakamoto  ;D
But, some people don't care about official bitcoin site

But i think people need good webiste about bitcoin (bitcoin.org / bitcoin.com / bitcointalk.org) where there are lot people together  ;D


So, they claimed to be official site & sell the domain for some fiat

Yes,Maybe someone don't know bitcoin well now,but it 's not a problem in a few years,by that time ,bitcoin will be very porpular and it's not a question for them.like that we all know "internet" is not a company.

Official or not, it is the only place I trust to download the Bitcoin core new versions. I think the lead Bitcoin developers updating the Bitcoin.org, thus official could be appropriate

yes, that was the old DMOZ description which is what the site used to be before is started being morphed:

Bitcoin-QT - The official bitcoin client

http://www.dmoz.org/search?q=bitcoin.org

Not cool. That is another problem about bitcoin. There is no governing body that determines who is the official this and the official that.

The website is definitelyone of the best, if not the best, if you have no idea what a Bitcoin is, and you are just getting started. I don't really think it matters if people are referring to it as the official website. It doesn't have anything that is harmful to Bitcoin or the community

What happens when the owners die and their heirs get control?

In any case the issue is resolved and the new description is on Google:

"Bitcoin is an innovative payment network and a new kind of money. Find all you need to know and get started with Bitcoin on bitcoin.org." 

Really ? so Bitcoin.org isn't official ? we can't trust anything there  :o
I thought that website + this forum was made by Satoshi him self  >:(

Do you automatically trust people you don't know because they write code? 

Well no , of course not. but I thought it was made by Satochi ... so Yeah I would automatically trust him (if it was him)  :-[

Squeaking wheel gets the grease, way to go girl.  ;)

But in fact Bitcoin is run by a small group of people IMO, that decide things like how the blockchain works.  Of course they will claim it's a democracy but in fact it is not, nor should it be.  The people who put the hard work in coding get to call the shots as to how bitcoin will work.  Most of them post here so unofficially this is the official site.  Offtopic:  I am looking forward to making bitcoin more anonymous, possibly with 'automatic mixing' of coins along the lines suggested by darkcoin.  I think the Powers That Be are also onto this.

Yes, but if they want their holding to be more valuable they are forced to allow others in.  What good is a developer's coin if nobody uses it?  I think most of the people involved have worked on software projects in small groups and dealing with large numbers of people/ideas is out of the normal things they do.  You can tell when they try to shoehorn everything into Github and IRC chat.

I think there is no need making a official site for Bitcoin.
It's nonsense!