Counter Announcement to The Bitcoin Foundation

[The_Duke]

Stand back everyone, I've got this one:

Somehow he sounds just as trustworthy as gavinmarkjonpatrickcharliepeter. 

[1714603023]

1714603023

[1714603023]

1714603023

[Come-from-Beyond]

I would not say its an uproar, its more like Atlas and a few haters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0 shows that only a half of bitcoiners support TBF. And more than a quarter against it.

[proudhon]

I would not say its an uproar, its more like Atlas and a few haters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0 shows that only a half of bitcoiners support TBF. And more than a quarter against it.

Only half?  That seems like quite a lot of support to me.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I would not say its an uproar, its more like Atlas and a few haters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0 shows that only a half of bitcoiners support TBF. And more than a quarter against it.

Only half?  That seems like quite a lot of support to me.

True. But a quarter shouldn't be called "a few" too.

[Portnoy]

Do we get to guess for a month what this latest announcement will be? 

I am guess that it will be an announcement of the formation of the new

Hazek/Atlas Total Economic Revolution Society

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

[URSAY]

I don't think everyone questioning this is a troll.

Charlie's "open offices" are not as open as he always mentions.  I had tried to meet with him recently regarding this pro Bitcoin project and the offices were always too busy.  I believe I tried meeting with him in person for about a week before I gave up.

This is simply not true.

Forgive us if you try to come during meetings, ect.. but we also have a business to run.

However, people are here all day and just show up, everyone is always invited.

If you wanted to stop in, just do the same, or email rachel@bitinstant.com to do so.
Your claim is inconsistant with what you said, and simply does not make sense.

PM me directly because I have no idea who you are.

-Charlie

I actually had your direct email.  We went back and forth quite a few times before I gave up.  You always told me to call before I actually stopped in.  Once I got as far as being outside of your offices and calling as we agreed on a time for me to show up...no one answered.  I also tried coming in the morning but you said before 9 am was too early.  We have a string of failed emails but BitPay was ready to Skype with me so no worries.

I'm grateful for BitInstant.  I really do enjoy your service.  Your open office NYC meetup thing was also a very nice gesture to the community.  But let's be honest...you said yourself that you have no idea who I am so why would you say I'm lying?

[greyhawk]

I would not say its an uproar, its more like Atlas and a few haters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0 shows that only a half of bitcoiners support TBF. And more than a quarter against it.

Yeah, but Atlas has like 400 accounts...

[kjj]

I would not say its an uproar, its more like Atlas and a few haters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0 shows that only a half of bitcoiners support TBF. And more than a quarter against it.

Ever hear of selection bias?  This poll is self selected.  Until you've done a valid random sampling with a neutral question, don't pretend that you have some valid insight into the moods of bitcoiners in bulk.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Ever hear of selection bias?  This poll is self selected.  Until you've done a valid random sampling with a neutral question, don't pretend that you have some valid insight into the moods of bitcoiners in bulk.

Is it possible to devise a more neutral question regarding the issue? 

[kjj]

Ever hear of selection bias?  This poll is self selected.  Until you've done a valid random sampling with a neutral question, don't pretend that you have some valid insight into the moods of bitcoiners in bulk.

Is it possible to devise a more neutral question regarding the issue? 

Well, three or four people have suggested that "foundation" will be confused by people to mean "the part of a building that keeps it from sinking into the ground" rather than "organization".  Context makes that one abundantly clear, but context is not sufficient to completely disambiguate "support" meaning "endorse, approve" vs. "support" meaning "give funds to (by donating or joining)".

[Come-from-Beyond]

Well, three or four people have suggested that "foundation" will be confused by people to mean "the part of a building that keeps it from sinking into the ground" rather than "organization".  Context makes that one abundantly clear, but context is not sufficient to completely disambiguate "support" meaning "endorse, approve" vs. "support" meaning "give funds to (by donating or joining)".

So? How would u paraphrase the question?

[Blind]

The haters are trollers say "ahhh foundation centralization ahh" when the smart people actually have good points and want to make it better.

See kids? If you have something against The Bitcoin Company, it just means you're dumb.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

I don't think everyone questioning this is a troll.

Charlie's "open offices" are not as open as he always mentions.  I had tried to meet with him recently regarding this pro Bitcoin project and the offices were always too busy.  I believe I tried meeting with him in person for about a week before I gave up.

This is simply not true.

Forgive us if you try to come during meetings, ect.. but we also have a business to run.

However, people are here all day and just show up, everyone is always invited.

If you wanted to stop in, just do the same, or email rachel@bitinstant.com to do so.
Your claim is inconsistant with what you said, and simply does not make sense.

PM me directly because I have no idea who you are.

-Charlie

I actually had your direct email.  We went back and forth quite a few times before I gave up.  You always told me to call before I actually stopped in.  Once I got as far as being outside of your offices and calling as we agreed on a time for me to show up...no one answered.  I also tried coming in the morning but you said before 9 am was too early.  We have a string of failed emails but BitPay was ready to Skype with me so no worries.

I'm grateful for BitInstant.  I really do enjoy your service.  Your open office NYC meetup thing was also a very nice gesture to the community.  But let's be honest...you said yourself that you have no idea who I am so why would you say I'm lying?

Still not sure who you are, please email me.

Thanks for the nice comments, but I feel bad we did not get to meet.

The haters are trollers say "ahhh foundation centralization ahh" when the smart people actually have good points and want to make it better.

See kids? If you have something against The Bitcoin Company, it just means you're dumb.

You are exactly what Im talking about

[kjj]

The haters are trollers say "ahhh foundation centralization ahh" when the smart people actually have good points and want to make it better.

See kids? If you have something against The Bitcoin Company, it just means you're dumb.

I would say that if the something you have against the BF is dumb, it means you're dumb, and most of the frothing I've seen has been dumb on an epic scale.  "Haters and trollers" doesn't seem to be an inaccurate term for most of them.

Maybe dumb is too harsh.  Maybe they are just too imaginative, and don't have any experience with organizations, or the governance structures they use.  Heh, I'm even nervous writing that, because I expect it to be quoted but not understood.  To be clear, all groups and organizations above the totally informal level have internal governance of some sort, it doesn't mean that they necessarily have or seek power over others.

So? How would u paraphrase the question?

Heh, that part is harder to do.  Avoiding biased language is much harder than spotting it.  For what it is worth, I don't think that "support" will cause much skew in the results, but the amount will probably be non-zero.  Maybe something more like "Do you think that the Bitcoin Foundation, as described by their initial bylaws (include the link), is a good idea?"  Potential answers could be along the lines of:

1) Yes.
2) There are some minor changes that I would like to see discussed, but they are within the capabilities of the bylaws.
3) There are some major changes that I think would need to be made before I could approve of it.
4) There are huge changes that need to be made, they should start over.
5) I don't think this is a good idea in the first place, they shouldn't do it.

This wouldn't be perfect, but I think it would be more useful than the current poll.  Note that nothing can prevent self-selection bias here on the forums.  You can't make people take polls, so those with stronger opinions would be over-represented to some unknown (but probably very large) extent.

[Blind]

The haters are trollers say "ahhh foundation centralization ahh" when the smart people actually have good points and want to make it better.

See kids? If you have something against The Bitcoin Company, it just means you're dumb.

You are exactly what Im talking about

Because I'm less than thrilled about bitcoin development team being in bed with two biggest bitcoin businesses? It helps to avoid conflict of interest, isn't it? You're a businessman Charlie, and I don't trust you, shall the situation arise, to act in the best interest of the community.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

The haters are trollers say "ahhh foundation centralization ahh" when the smart people actually have good points and want to make it better.

See kids? If you have something against The Bitcoin Company, it just means you're dumb.

You are exactly what Im talking about

Because I'm less than thrilled about bitcoin development team being in bed with two biggest bitcoin businesses? It helps to avoid conflict of interest, isn't it? You're a businessman Charlie, and I don't trust you, shall the situation arise, to act in the best interest of the community.

No, the merits of the argument have nothing to do with it. In fact, this is the first time you've even made a point from what I've read.

Your comment was exactly the type of comment that looks like trolling/hating. It was a response where you twisted my words around for your agenda.

What you should have done, was stated your position like you just did in the more recent comment

You don't trust me thats fine. Obviously, you dont understand the structure and how the foundation works if you think you need to trust me at all.

[gusti]

From bitcoin.org website :

Developers

Satoshi Nakamoto
Gavin Andresen
Pieter Wuille
Nils Schneider
Jeff Garzik
Wladimir J. van der Laan
Gregory Maxwell

Besides Gavin and Jeff, who already did, I'm very interested in hearing the opinion of all team members about the Foundation, and how they envision the future of bitcoin.

[Blind]

No, the merits of the argument have nothing to do with it. In fact, this is the first time you've even made a point from what I've read.

This was my second comment ever regarding the The Bitcoin Corporation, don't make it look like I was here for three days dribbling from my mouth.

Your comment was exactly the type of comment that looks like trolling/hating. It was a response where you twisted my words around for your agenda.

Lightly spirited joke, sorry. Your comment reads in vein of "must be a terrorist if wants privacy". And no, I'm just regular supervillain who wants bitcoin project to stay independent, undo the wrongdoing of fiat currencies, remove the power of governments to keep population by the balls by financial means. But you have a business Charlie, you're the one who has an agenda.

Obviously, you dont understand the structure and how the foundation works if you think you need to trust me at all.

Again, who's holding the steering wheel now, Charlie?

[Come-from-Beyond]

From bitcoin.org website :

Developers

Satoshi Nakamoto
Gavin Andresen
Pieter Wuille
Nils Schneider
Jeff Garzik
Wladimir J. van der Laan
Gregory Maxwell

Besides Gavin and Jeff, who already did, I'm very interested in hearing the opinion of all team members about the Foundation, and how they envision the future of bitcoin.

The rest r supposed to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

[IIOII]

You don't trust me thats fine. Obviously, you dont understand the structure and how the foundation works if you think you need to trust me at all.

That's a good one.