Informing Bitcoin Policy: a Centralised or Decentralised Approach?

[No_2]

Much as I dislike lobbying and indeed am starting to think it should be prohibited I wanted to open a discussion on the pros and cons of having a bitcoin lobbyist group. A group, funded by bitcoin users that could advise to various bodies, NGOs and government about bitcoin.

Just to be clear I am not advocating this: I want to consider the implications of what would happen if this where to take place as often organisations such as this start to look after their own self interests.

Conversely what would be the pros and cons of a purely decentralised approach to informing NGO and government policy?

[No_2]

This is the kind of thing I wanted to discuss in this thread before it 'went to print':

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=169440.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=169438.0

The very concept of an elected leader has always seemed a very odd social assumption to me. I cant seen any benefit to the above.

[No_2]

This is a good example of the kind of thing I was trying to pre-empt to some degree:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/42ca6762-bbfc-11e2-82df-00144feab7de,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F42ca6762-bbfc-11e2-82df-00144feab7de.html&_i_referer=#axzz2T3OP4P3R

What was discussed at this meeting and what were it's conclusions? What original sources of evidence were used? How was this information disseminated?

Being UK centric, I'm going to see if I can find out any more on this conference.

[No_2]

http://reason.com/24-7/2013/05/18/bitcoin-foundation-to-hire-first-lobbyis

This is the whole (short) piece:

Peter Vessenes, the executive director of the Bitcoin Foundation who's also enmeshed in a messy lawsuit against Mt. Gox, also stressed the need for governmental cooperation.

"We'll be hiring someone to work on [Capitol] Hill and interact with regulators," Vessenes said. "I'm someone who thinks we should have a civil conversation... It's time to engage with regulators and have a good, productive conversation."

Then again, that didn't stop the E-Gold online payment system from being shut down after a federal indictment on charges of money laundering. Not only did E-Gold chairman Douglas Jackson interact with regulators, he even testified before the U.S. Congress a year before the indictment took place.

... May the force be with them. 

And this....

[SamS]

I guess the question is how do you not end up with regulation at the Fiat/Crypto interface? The guys that control Fiat aren't going to let you into their world except on their terms. It can be negotiated a bit but the truth is it's their world. Unless Bitcoin grows large enough to replace a substantial portion of Fiat use directly, then there will be regulation. If there's regulation, then there will be special interest groups competing to get the Government to slant the rules their way. I can't see that Fiat processing companies would have any interest in letting Bitcoin come in and compete more cheaply. So, it's going to be a tussle. Asked as a sincere question, "why wouldn't those with a vested interest in Bitcoin's success want to have representation on these issues?" Unless, people can see a viable non-Fiat transmission/growth path, it would seem to be a no-brainer.

As to who/what organization that should be, I think we should be honest that the real funders are going to be those that stand to make the greatest profit -- or take the greatest loss if things go sour. It's not desirable from a libertarian point of view, but that doesn't change the reality of the financial calculus.

[Luckybit]

Much as I dislike lobbying and indeed am starting to think it should be prohibited I wanted to open a discussion on the pros and cons of having a bitcoin lobbyist group. A group, funded by bitcoin users that could advise to various bodies, NGOs and government about bitcoin.

Just to be clear I am not advocating this: I want to consider the implications of what would happen if this where to take place as often organisations such as this start to look after their own self interests.

Conversely what would be the pros and cons of a purely decentralised approach to informing NGO and government policy?

Both. The Internet is both centralized and decentralized. Bitcoin will have to be both centralized and decentralized, but where you can be decentralized and secure you should.