Bitcoin Forum

New Bitcoin Foundation Mission Statement was published for comment.

Three new board seats were announced as well.

The foundation also removed Satoshi Nakamoto as a founding member and made that seat an optional one on the grounds that we don't have any indication Satoshi agreed to this.


http://bitcoinfoundation.org/previous-candidates-lingham-perklin-pouliot-appointed-to-board-draft-mission-statement-approved-for-comment/

Please just disband your foundation already. All you guys do is spend insane amounts of money to do nothing that promotes wider adoption of bitcoin.

EDIT: Removed my previous kiddy-diddler comment until more compelling evidence surfaces.

We were told that previous change of leadership was supposed to turn the foundation around, so I don't see how this one will yield better results.  It's still a festering sinkhole for money and it's probably never going to change. 

Literally, the only purpose it serves is to prove that such outdated governance models don't work.  All centralised systems are prone to corruption and you're doing a fantastic job of demonstrating that.

They have done an awesome job of showing us who not to trust - Charlie Shrem, Mark Karpeles, etc. Gavin Andresen has made a laughingstock of you all with this XT business as well.

Three new board seats? What, three new seats for people to enjoy football player-like salaries and paid expenses? ::)


I guess all those perks of being from the Foundation paid off and for all of you to continue with this is because you're not really bankrupt...

Your mission statement is amazing. Now you guys just have to apply it without having any scandals throughout the way, or members ending up being scammers.

Excuse me for the harsh comments, but based on recent news and actions of the Foundation, you guys are just useless. You have to REALLY do a good job now and impress if you want to continue and have your reputation back up.

Just to be clear, no board member recieves a salary.  There are also no expenses paid for board members.

The Executive Director role used to be paid and is now also volunteer, some minimal out of pocket expenses are reimbursed.

It is correct that the Bitcoin Foundation overspent in the past.  No one involved with those decisions is still with the foundation.

We can only do what we can moving forward.

I'd urge people to look at the actual mission statement and make comments.  The Bitcoin Foundation is here and exists, most productive thing is to see how we can most effectively have this organization serve Bitcoin.

I'll believe this when I see it. You guys have yelled transparency and make unprovable statements, yet this still doesn't work: https://bitcoinfoundation.org/transparency/
Spring of 2015 has long passed, and 2016 is upon us. Does it take that long to cook the books? I mean, that giant donation button at the bottom of the page still works.

So you are saying that you think I am lying when I say there are no board or ED salaries?

The financial records have been released, yes, the website needs work, it's been improving since a new webmaster (also volunteer) came aboard.

No, I simply said "I'll believe it when I see it". I have no issues calling a liar a liar if they are in fact lying. That isn't the case here.

The onus is on The Bitcoin Foundation, which has done nothing but paint themselves fools since inception, to show us why this changing of the guard matters at all. I have to agree with Olivier Janssens that the whole thing should be dissolved, as there continues to be no direction or plan besides the same circlejerk everyone has seen for years.

r/bitcoin is an echo-chamber for sure, but a lot of people made some good points here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3wyt85/ive_just_been_forcibly_removed_from_the_bitcoin/


Also from: https://github.com/BruceFenton/bitcoinfoundationplan



This is the funniest of all. Your "Chief Scientist" sure has acted like a petulant child because no one in the community wanted XT.

put it out of it's suffering and let it die.

I guess now we're talking. Please do surprise me :) And don't forget about those detailed finance/accounting reports...

We have been releasing this information, to be totally honest I don't think people read it.

The IRS Form 880 and minutes are released.

The minutes have at times even been in near transcript format.

Our burn rate now is $7-8k a month - that covers things like web hosting, fixed costs, a part time bookkeeper and a near full time ops person.

for someone to make such a mission statement as:

you have to atleast have some idea of plans to achieve these.
please do not just say it will be discussed in the future. atleast tell the world what the foundation (in real world actions and work) will do. what actual things the foundation will physically do..
without waffling about meeting discussions and board room voting and please do not say setting up committee's as that is just more office gossiping.. i mean real world things outside the office that impact and affect the real world population that have never used bitcoin.

so please tell us.. what will the bitcoin foundation actually do to the outside world.
so far all i see is PAID conventions

Just hope these new guys are not like the older ones and do something for real! If the foundation is going to prevail they need to start to have a close link with the rest of the community.

This plan was just released for member comment today and our meeting had other items on it including three new board members.

There are some ideas on the how portion of this -- for example DevCore under the 1st item and the speakers bureau under the 2nd.   We don't promise to be earth shattering -- just to help Bitcoin in the ways which are possible.

We also won't focus on the action items until we get more member feedback on the plan itself to see if these are even indeed the items we should focus on.   So far it seems popular but it's only been a day.

Thanks very much

im not interested in who the office bench sitters are. or what title or group name they are in.. im interested in what real world actions will be done..
not some fuzzy misdirected umbrella term that has no specifics. which involves spending days, weeks, months shuffling papers and creating group names to waste  time and money.

the best thing to do is forget about group names and just think about who will physically do what..

once you know who will/can do what. then get them to do it.. then as more people help out.. then and only then should you categorize them.. not for any other reason but to help those individuals communicate to each other

it can be achieved easily by setting skype groups or IRC channels. (no paperwork /monthly meetings needed)

because some actions may require some people to do different tasks and thus plopping them in a certain group now might be meaningless in a few days because they are jumping in and out of different projects/tasks.. which is then wasted time until the next meeting. just to discuss who fits into which group again and again and again..


you still have not defined a precise agenda.
there is no point setting up a politics committee until you know there are people willing to eg: fight/repeal the bitlicence by actually going to government buildings to lobby.
(i bet you have not even got anyone ready to lobby, but have already thought about setting up a committee for this current empty spot)
there is no point setting up a conference organizing committee unless you know that there are people in the area of desired future conferences to fully oversee it.
(i bet you have not even got anyone ready to organize the next conference, but have already thought about setting up a committee for this spot)

for years i have seen bitcoin foundation waste time giving people glamorous titles but never seeing actual actions/results

so please try something different.. real world actions first, glamorous titles second

Definitely looking for member feedback on this mission statement as well as help crafting a plan.

I don't care much about what the titles are - it is often useful to have a champion of some sort who drives things and feels responsible / can push things forward.  Chair titles can also be useful in public facing matters like Marco Santori, Chair of Regulatory Affairs Committee -- he has more weight with than than just noting to the press or regulators that he's a really smart lawyer.

As for getting things done -- please judge the people involved on what we actually have done and not done.

We understand the problems you spoke of but that's the point of a turnaround.  I wasn't involved in the decisions you are not happy with -- just trying to look at where we are now and where we can go from here.

As far as the plan seems like the order we are thinking makes sense for project management is:
1st : Agree on what we stand for, what our priorities are and what we want to see happen (such as these three main areas)
2:  Decide what actions, based on our resources can be done to make progress in item #1
3:  Make a specific timetable, set of action items and assignments of people to implement

Would welcome input, especially on GitHub

Why only foster Core development?  Why not support development in general--actually encouraging decentralization away from Core?

i too prefer the foundation to just be a signposting operation. not there to order things or control things. but just to aid the communication and guidance for many projects.
like a directory service, where you can find all of the projects, tutorials, and resources in one place (not stored, just listed directory)
where anyone can be part of.

i think that the whole 'only paid members can vote' thing, needs to be re-evaluated.. maybe leave it open(free)membership but then have the voting cost something using bitcoin addresses for each vote criteria and the funds of those votes go to that idea
(think mini kickstarter) (mike hearns lighthouse idea)

that way the foundation would feel less like an inhouse boysclub, and more of a communication hub for everything bitcoin, where all projects are not inhouse, but linked and signposted via the foundation

Great point.

To you have a suggestion for wording?

This is an active document in GitHub as we speak

I like the suggestion of making it a placeholder and gatherer of ideas.

Not a fan of the elections in general, not efficient and don't seem to help us help Bitcoin.

Sure!

**********************************
FOSTERING PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT

The foundation seeks to foster continued advancement of the Bitcoin protocol by encouraging multiple protocol implementations and by increasing knowledge about the development process.  Not only do multiple protocol implementations improve code diversity and network robustness, but they also increase opportunities for new developers to get involved.   New developers can work with a team that shares similar ideologies and work ethics, allowing each new developer to contribute to her fullest, benefitting the overall Bitcoin ecosystem in the process.

The primary tool for this is the [__needs a new name__] conference series which is designed to "Develop the Developers" there have so far been three events: London, Boston and San Jose.

The events have included as faculty well known leading developers and technical experts such as Greg Maxwell, Gavin Andresen, Charlie Lee, Jeff Garzik, Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Matt Corallo, Jeremy Allaire, Michael Perklin, Sean Neville and others.

Additional work for fostering development is in the areas of exploring better ways to bridge the gap of knowledge between development and the public and corporations.

The foundation Chief Scientist is Gavin Andresen. The foundation also wishes to create a Technical Communications Committee which will be chaired by someone with significant knowledge about core development. The primary role of this committee will be to bridge the gap between protocol development and the public and business leaders by updating members of the industry on current events in development and what they mean to the Bitcoin industry.
**********************************

whats needed is better commenting of code. maybe as a separate code repository where each line of code is commented to explain things better, back in my day we not only had to comment code, but also write 'pseudo-code' (laymans version) to help explain it better.

its ok to only write code if your the only coder and you understand where one line of code affects the other instantly.. but when there are strangers looking at it or taking over projects then it must be made as simple as possible for others to read the code and understand it without having to scroll pages of pure code just to find references and functions to get to know how it works

Agreed!

Thanks for the productive comments.

The Bitcoin Foundation belongs to everyone in Bitcoin it's as much yours as it is mine or any other member or the boards.

I think the foundation was a joke and instead of wishing it to be destroyed I accepted a volunteer offer to work to fix it.

If we all put our heads and a little effort and acknowledge that the past is the past and say we've got this thing, let's do something useful with it then that is a positive.

The Bitcoin Foundation's name is too tainted in my opinion and will never get much community support. They way Oliver was axed was the final straw for many I would guess. I like what you are trying Bruce, but you would be better off forming something new. How many people would be willing to donate to the current foundation after all the history it has?

though the foundation has a nasty history. IF its reorganized so that people are not buying memberships or donating to a pot of funds that has not even been made clear how is spent. but instead organized so that people only put in any amount they want to a certain idea/project. and this scheme is advertised like kickstarter, then the foundation may actually find they see more people contributing

Agreed. I wouldn't waste a single satoshi to buy water if one of the members was on fire. Pretty much all "The Bitcoin Foundation" is good for is kissing political ass and making the community at large look like thieves, liars, and preschoolers.

No thanks.


If this is true, return my donation from ~2 years ago. I'll call it a wash. /s

I agree 100%. I would donate/fund a foundation with a clear set of guidelines and goals. I want a group that has a plan and will efficiently spend the funds they get towards something that helps Bitcoin...not the staff of a foundation.

100% agree

Just for reference the board and Executive Director are all volunteers,  the only paid staff are a part time bookeeper and a part time ops person

We know, you have repeated this like a drunk parrot about 1000 times in the past week. The mismanagement of funds ( including Gavin's salaray) is at issue here.

I don't remotely trust any type of self appointed Bitcoin Foundation. I think it stinks tbh & I'd rather place any trust I have in the miners & actual bitcoin community/users.

How long before this foundation start paying themselves obscene bonuses & acting like fiat banks.

Not for me sadly, I'm not interested in supporting them.

Looking at the (finally released) 2014 financial statements there are lots of funds that simply can't be accounted for properly. I agree that the community itself is the real "foundation". A six figure salary for a "Chief Scientist" that does little besides work on his own fork of Bitcoin is ridiculous.

I'm sure The Foundation can get Roger Verified though. He'll shill for anything.

The expenses listed on the 990 form for 2014 were made by a different administration than is there now.

The current expenses are low.

I'd ask people to judge the foundation and people involved by the actual acts they were or are responsible for.

It's harder to be a turnaround team when the new people are blamed for the actions of those they replaced.