The status quo is never rational. If we can keep creating this new network, in months down the road Bitcoin will appear a rational decision to some of those that doubt it now as the larger economy continues its slow slide to Crapville.

If history is any indication the idea of a Bitcoin Foundation can lead to a central authority system that will be susceptible to third party influence.

I just want to say that only one of them ( the captain ) knew what he was talking about. ( also the lawyer seems to understand the problem, but he was afraid to make any statement )
The woman was totally unqualified, she said a lot of nonsensical things.

Voluntary? What is voluntary by demanding to get paid for the providing of resources?

The Digg effect. It happened at reddit and hacker news, too. They're now full of people that appear to have been born wearing suits.

Or language to this effect as lawyers find suitable to ensure secret changes aren't given to programmers and then compelled to be implemented via fear of job loss.

Then why haven't I seen any acknowledgement on that to the contrary? I'd breathe much easier if someone at a high level just said they believe the entity should seek to LIMIT its power in all sensible ways.

I don't think anyone would say it was. I think people generally agree (including lead Bitcoin developers) that people were pretty stupid on their own.

Now, that's small scale damage. There are over 300 million people in the U.S. alone and there are billions of people globally. Bitcoin is global. How many of these people would you wager are much different from the people that got taken in the scam?

Now, imagine The Bitcoin Foundation becomes widely viewed as the legitimate de facto face of Bitcoin. Millions of people recognize it as such, because of how many other do. This is similar to how many people use Google, not because they understand the nuances of why/how it produces better results, but because it's perceived as the top by everyone else. Why do you think Google's founders immediately made a goal to "do no evil"? It's because they knew the enormous power and influence they would get, whether deserved or not, far into the future, whether they continued to be deserving or not. Do you know how much "evil" Google could get away without losing any real share of users? Just think creatively for a moment. I'm talking censorship, favorites for rankings etc.

What you are failing to see is how this is different.

The way Gavin has controlled the widespread bitcoin implementation has been in an UNOFFICIALLY recognized way. That's why it was okay. Any power that came with what he did was minor, and could be challenged if need be fairly easily.

Just one example: how much Google link juice do you think Gavin got from administering the mailing list. I'm willing to bet zero. Now, how much Google link juice would a formal entity marketed as representing Bitcoin get for the same activities such as administering a mailing list. See the difference?

That's just one example. Another is people's perception of who has what sort of power. If a new bitcoin person was told a developer did things in a sort of patchwork way to get things done, that's one thing. If that same person is told a staff member of an official organization handles x items for Bitcoin, that's quite another. One infers power and authority, while the other doesn't do so much if at all.

As for what is linked from where, like this forum, all that can change. That's where the problem is. The way things appear now can change.

Stylistic issues are best addressed by fixing them whenever you happen to be updating some part of the code for other reasons. Otherwise it's just gratuitous, and there's always a risk of introducing extra bugs.

Oh, and you do have a comprehensive test suite, I assume? If not, then writing a set of tests will repay your effort far more than rewriting code that uses PHP's "echo" statement.

= 0.0005 bitcoins

You are trying to limit what people can and can't do with their bitcoins and their right to form a collective. You are the kind of person who is trying to shackle peoples' freedoms in the name of keeping bitcoin "pure" and holding up the bitcoin community as if it were the state.

Which place likely has more people devoted to the Bitcoin community and knowledgeable about Bitcoin? This forum or Reddit?

I meant him ACTUALLY doing it.

Is there a reason you're answering questions there are opposed to here?

\\
The problem I have with this Foundation is that it asserted itself over this experiment and the community. No one asked you to. No one gave you permission. You just did it. You created a corporation to wield power no one granted you.

I wouldn't have a shred of a problem if you were a for profit business dependent on voluntary transactions which merely contracted with Gavin and his team. But you aren't and he is a board member inherently always with a conflict of interest. And saying I can start my own Foundation is disingenuous at best since you know I can't be the one that pays Gavin or his team and have the same power as you do.

By electing not-geeks?

The Bitcoin Foundation won't have any direct control over the Bitcoin network, which will continue to operate independent of any institution. But the foundation hopes to accelerate the network's growth by supporting both better software and broader public awareness.