Care about Bitcoin? STAY AWAY from the "Bitcoin Fundation"

[shad0wbitz]

I think the mission statement for the fundation should read:

"To advance the interest of the biggest players in the industry (mtgox and bitinstant), who already have their hands on everything Bitcoin related. To annihilate competition and to foster camaraderie between the good ol'boys, and to elect a board of directors without any democratic input whatsoever from the true owners of Bitcoins: Its community. Finally, to provide a tax exempt vehicle to pay Gavin Andersen for developing open source, free software".

NO THANK YOU!. We have enough of the Bitinstant/MtGox vaporware and nonsense. I am going to pass on this one.

How about NOBODY that PROFIT from Bitcoin should be on the board? How about not having the SAME attorney for BitInstant and Roger Ver on the board of an "independent" fundation.

I am sorry, but this is a transvestite, just like the last organization that Charlie Shrem and Vorhees were involved with the scammer Matthew N. Wright http://dcao.org/

I hope this community REMEMBERS. I would urge anybody caring about Bitcoin to stay away from this monopoly.

[eb3full]

You have not delegated any authority to this foundation, and it has not deprived the public of their authority over the protocol. It is the miners and the users of Bitcoin software that determine collectively the behavior of the blockchain. This foundation is arbitrarily structured to provide the most amount of public input in development -- especially entities that have an enormous influence on changes in the protocol, and so it does nothing to centralize Bitcoin any more than a respected team of developers have already done. But even if it were designed to position only the financial elite in its structure, it would do so at the expense of its own credibility and perhaps the merit of its activities.

You have the right to give a damn what this foundation says. It is merely an aggregation of talent and advocacy.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

You obviously have a vendetta or maybe you are sour that no one involved you in this.

MtGox and BitInstant are listed there because they are the first corporate members. You are more than welcome to join as well. In fact, if you own 1 BTC then you are a profiteer as well when the price goes up.

Second, BitInstant and myself had no involvment with the DCAO other than Matt inviting me to it (like every other Bitcoin business owner was) and putting my name on the website..which I asked him to take down many times.

The foundation is extremely democratic. All you have to do is join for the smallest membership and you can be on the board as well by voting, the same way the other board members are on it.

We've spent hunreds of thousands of dollars and speak to regulators, goverment officials, corporate execs, ect. They all agreed that a foundation neds to be in place for Bitcoin to succeed.

No one owns the foundation, and board seats are not for life. Anyone can run the foundation, just like Bitcoin it runs itself.

If you don't want to join, thats fine, won't change anything.

-Charlie

[shad0wbitz]

Here we go. The witch hunt begins. Now I have a vendetta, next thing you know, I am banned and gagged. Can't I express my personal opinion?

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Here we go. The witch hunt begins. Now I have a vendetta, next thing you know, I am banned and gagged. Can't I express my personal opinion?

You are more than welcome to, no one is banning or gagging you, why are you so paranoid?

Personal opinion is commendable, but you need to make sure your facts and claims are accurate because then your opinion just looks like FUD.

I've pointed our your errors here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113400.msg1225486#msg1225486

I'm happy to answer any questions, feel free to PM me.

-Charlie

[Polvos]

I agree with you shadow. Bitcoin has no user database as it has no face. Users don't need to pay in order to have "the right to vote" for the next developing branch. If a user needs something different from the "selfdeclared official core developers" patches all he has to do is put a bounty in the developers subforum.

[shad0wbitz]

You obviously have a vendetta or maybe you are sour that no one involved you in this.

MtGox and BitInstant are listed there because they are the first corporate members. You are more than welcome to join as well. In fact, if you own 1 BTC then you are a profiteer as well when the price goes up.

Second, BitInstant and myself had no involvment with the DCAO other than Matt inviting me to it (like every other Bitcoin business owner was) and putting my name on the website..which I asked him to take down many times.

The foundation is extremely democratic. All you have to do is join for the smallest membership and you can be on the board as well by voting, the same way the other board members are on it.

We've spent hunreds of thousands of dollars and speak to regulators, goverment officials, corporate execs, ect. They all agreed that a foundation neds to be in place for Bitcoin to succeed.

No one owns the foundation, and board seats are not for life. Anyone can run the foundation, just like Bitcoin it runs itself.

If you don't want to join, thats fine, won't change anything.

-Charlie

The fact remains that you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars speaking to people because you make hundreds of thousands out of Bitcoin. The fact remains that having your lawyer as the foundation's lawyer is probably not the best idea. The fact remains that the board was orchestrated, selected and appointed without any input from the community. Lastly, the fact remains that there is a big difference between an individual owning 1 bitcoin and profiting in cents from price changes, to monolithic corporations that together control at least 80% of the bitcoin market.

I do not have a problem with Gavin being in there. I do have a problem with you and Mark being there, and with your lawyer being there. I think anybody that cares about the FREEDOM of Bitcoin should have a problem with this as well. I am not on a "personal vendetta" and as a board member, I think you should choose your wording more carefully when speaking to a member of this community voicing his concerns, and keep this as a democratic debate, otherwise the foundation might be perceived as an entity that will be quick to call names to those that disagree with them.

[shad0wbitz]

By the way, I want to add that I don't necessarily have a problem with you as a person, or your company. Same with Mark. I just think you guys should stay out of this.

[shad0wbitz]

I agree with you shadow. Bitcoin has no user database as it has no face. Users don't need to pay in order to have "the right to vote" for the next developing branch. If a user needs something different from the "selfdeclared official core developers" patches all he has to do is put a bounty in the developers subforum.

Yes as I said in the other thread, this whole thing goes against the spirit of Bitcoin and Satoshi. Do you know you cannot join the foundation without providing your "REAL" information? Satoshi wouldn't be able to join for example.

[BitcoinBug]

Yes as I said in the other thread, this whole thing goes against the spirit of Bitcoin and Satoshi. Do you know you cannot join the foundation without providing your "REAL" information? Satoshi wouldn't be able to join for example.

If there is no identity checking, one with a lot of money could have dozens of votes. This goes even more against decentralization and democracy.

[Polvos]

In fact we don't have a "dollar foundation" or an "euro foundation". Currencies don't have fans club. Noone speaks with the voice of the dollar or euro. They don't need to become more human or hire a marketing responsible. They only work as an interchange medium and a way to store value (this last point only metals and bitcoin)

[Gabi]

Pay for the right to vote? Vote what?

and this too is lol:

to regulators, goverment officials

They all agreed that a foundation neds to be in place for Bitcoin to succeed.

Yeah well they are the same who said "police will go after bitcoin staff" and then when they told them that there is no one behind bitcoin "then they will go after bitcoin server farms and infrastructure"? My opinion is, do the opposite of what "regulators" and "government officials" say 

dozens of votes

But to vote what? Miners and people who use bitcoin vote. Not the foundation.

[casascius]

I stand in support of the premise of the creation of the Bitcoin Foundation, and trust the intents of the individuals on its board.  I disavow the OP's advice of "stay away" and disagree with the claims that it exists to annihilate the competition of its board members.  I agree with the sentiment that there needs to be a foundation in order for government officials and executives to take Bitcoin seriously.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

In fact we don't have a "dollar foundation" or an "euro foundation". Currencies don't have fans club. Noone speaks with the voice of the dollar or euro. They don't need to become more human or hire a marketing responsible. They only work as an interchange medium and a way to store value (this last point only metals and bitcoin)

Bitcoin = Currency

bitcoin = transactional monetary protocol.

[BitcoinBug]

I stand in support of the premise of the creation of the Bitcoin Foundation, and trust the intents of the individuals on its board.  I disavow the OP's advice of "stay away" and disagree with the claims that it exists to annihilate the competition of its board members.  I agree with the sentiment that there needs to be a foundation in order for government officials and executives to take Bitcoin seriously.

+1

[greyhawk]

Currencies don't have fans club.

I see you've never been in Germany. Currencies DO have fan clubs. And how they do.

Then there's also this forum. If this isn't a fan club, I don't know what it is.

[jimbobway]

I think having something (a foundation) is better than having nothing at all.  Anyone can join the foundation.  Anyone can create their own foundation.  The problem with people like shadowbitz is that they are complaining because they don't own a successful business and they start whining about it since they are the "little guys."  There will always be big players and little players and alliances will form.  In the case of the Bitcoin Foundation the big players are actually trying to benefit the whole bitcoin community and the whole world and I don't see anything negative about this.

With that said, I think bitcoin is bigger than any foundation.  The current Bitcoin Foundation is a corporate non-profit entity derived from the state and backed by legal laws.  Some centralization is required to promote bitcoin and my guess is a "true" bitcoin foundation emerge and will be separate from the state and will be backed by multi-signature transactions and perhaps even use force (like a military).  When this happens the current Bitcoin Foundation will be less important and may even dissolve just like how lovebitcoins.org dissolved.  Alliances are broken and formed all the time but at this point the Bitcoin Foundation is a good thing and I hope it can last a long time and make a difference.

[Gabi]

The Foundation is fine for me, it will probably help bitcoin.

But i disagree with

in order for government officials and executives to take Bitcoin seriously

This remember me the scene in the beginning of the movie The Scorpion King

when Takmet says to Balthazar "You are king of nothing ... the ruler of a pile of sands and rocks" and then Balthazar grabs his hands and squeezed them and tell him "If I am no king, why are you kneeling before me?"

Same apply here. They don't take bitcoin seriously? Then why with bitcoin i can buy everything?

[knight22]

In fact we don't have a "dollar foundation" or an "euro foundation". Currencies don't have fans club. Noone speaks with the voice of the dollar or euro. They don't need to become more human or hire a marketing responsible. They only work as an interchange medium and a way to store value (this last point only metals and bitcoin)

This is not true. Central banks are the voice of the dollar or euro.

[knight22]

I think having something (a foundation) is better than having nothing at all.  Anyone can join the foundation.  Anyone can create their own foundation.  The problem with people like shadowbitz is that they are complaining because they don't own a successful business and they start whining about it since they are the "little guys."  There will always be big players and little players and alliances will form.  In the case of the Bitcoin Foundation the big players are actually trying to benefit the whole bitcoin community and the whole world and I don't see anything negative about this.

With that said, I think bitcoin is bigger than any foundation.  The current Bitcoin Foundation is a corporate non-profit entity derived from the state and backed by legal laws.  Some centralization is required to promote bitcoin and my guess is a "true" bitcoin foundation emerge and will be separate from the state and will be backed by multi-signature transactions and perhaps even use force (like a military).  When this happens the current Bitcoin Foundation will be less important and may even dissolve just like how lovebitcoins.org dissolved.  Alliances are broken and formed all the time but at this point the Bitcoin Foundation is a good thing and I hope it can last a long time and make a difference.

+1