The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues.

[repentance]

If they can't tolerate people having their own perspective, that's just too damn bad.

The fucking irony.  You're the poster child for being unable to tolerate people having their own perspective - you label them "threats" to Bitcoin.

[Atlas]

If they can't tolerate people having their own perspective, that's just too damn bad.

The fucking irony.  You're the poster child for being unable to tolerate people having their own perspective - you label them "threats" to Bitcoin.

I do accept their perspective. I just won't accept their potential actions and influence.

[TheBible]

If they can't tolerate people having their own perspective, that's just too damn bad.

The fucking irony.  You're the poster child for being unable to tolerate people having their own perspective - you label them "threats" to Bitcoin.

I do accept their perspective. I just won't accept their potential actions and influence.

You delete their posts.  We've all seen your wiki.  Anything you disagree with you simply silence.  You never even attempt discourse, you just delete.  You silence others to make your own views the only ones heard.  You're a fascist.

[Atlas]

Nothing is stopping from women joining in. People having certain opinions about humanoids with vaginas isn't banning women from this forum.  

If they can't tolerate people having their own perspective, that's just too damn bad.

I'm not against a bit of 'harden the f**k up' as far as online speech goes, but I'm also not averse to initiatives to bring counter-voices in to verbally smack them down.
As we saw with the whole jessy/vegetta thing - that can work pretty nicely.

In the meantime - anyone should be able to smack down that crap whether or not they have penis and identify as male,female or something else; without retarded claims of 'white knighting'.   Well - claim it if you want - but it's dumb.

Nobody's *forcing* you to be a nice person Atlas, I'm just arguing for it in general as a measure which will
a) make this place a little more representative of society as a whole (nearly half the potential population avoiding it isn't a good start)
b) grow the Bitcoin userbase

Do you really have a problem with that?

I just don't find male:female ratios relevant at all. People associate as they please. There are plenty of cultural and psychological reasons for why there aren't many women here and it goes beyond misogynism.

High levels of estrogen and cortisol can change a person.

[Atlas]

Atlas is organising a Texas meet-up. I hope a woman Bitcoiner attends and punches him in the balls.

Kinky.

[The_Duke]

It's one thing for the EFF not to accept Bitcoin for it's own reasons specific to legal advocacy - but from the above, we see that their about-face and public statements continue to damage Bitcoin's reputation in the non-profit sphere.

Are you suggesting that an organisation that is not a defacto, official, recognised body of authority, but just a foundation that is supposed to give advise and steer in a certain direction is actually being listened to by people to the extend it has an effect on things? That people don't look further than the first thing they see and just take their truth for granted? And you're not happy with how this foundation operates? Because it hurts bitcoin? That's a really bad thing indeed. _{My god, imagine that happening to bitcoin!} 

But what is so great about this? The BEST way to change this (according to a founding member of the foundation) is to become a member and make your vote count. Good luck, and please let us know how it worked out for you!

[repentance]

High levels of estrogen and cortisol can change a person.

/r/MensRights must be very proud of you.

[Atlas]

High levels of estrogen and cortisol can change a person.

/r/MensRights must be very proud of you.

I like /r/AndrogynousRights myself.

[Luno]

Responding to earlier in this thread about the EFF.

You could ask the EFF to let their lawyer elaborate on, in writing, the pitfals in Bitcoin, taxation and law he considers dangerous. That would be helpful to Bitcoin being able to give an "official" argumented response to this, not to prove EFF wrong in general about this, but to disprove the arguments. If we ask them to help us on this it would make no sense to rant the EFF for being against Bitcoin. The EFF is important to the world for a lot of other reasons.

The Bitcoin Foundation is valuable exactly for a situation like this, and I'm sure they will need a lawyer at some point too.

There are a lot of NGO's, no need to force someone to be an early adopter.

[Eiii]

I don't think this is a huge deal. The EFF is just advising that bitcoin could be a legal liability-- not that bitcoins are worthless, not that they're a fraud, not any of the countless things that people have said to try to discredit bitcoin. Just that adopting it may cause legal troubles down the road. If you think they're misadvising their clients by doing that, you're insane.

It'd be great if the EFF started pushing bitcoin, sure. There's no doubt in my mind that bitcoin or some similar cryptocurrency will significantly change how we transfer money in the next few decades regardless of what the EFF thinks. They don't have any obligation to defend or support bitcoin and I don't see why we should be upset at them for giving reasonable legal advice.

[Piper67]

This would be a good test case for the Bitcoin Foundation, no? Try and get the EFF to change their stand on Bitcoin.

[FLHippy]

I've now pointed out to them the underrepresentation of women in the bitcoin community - along with how misogynistic it can be in here:
"How do we get the women on board?' https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=32386.0

Not the greatest advertisement for this community I'll admit; but if their mission really is to get females more involved in open source Technology - you'd think they'd be interested in addressing this imbalance.

You gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women.

[marcus_of_augustus]

This would be a good test case for the Bitcoin Foundation, no? Try and get the EFF to change their stand on Bitcoin.

meh, foundations ... who needs 'em?

the EFF (epic freedom fail) and TBF (the bitcoin fail) can get together and do nothing about everything and put the worlds to rights

[Shadow383]

How can accepting bitcoin be a problem with services like bit-pay around 

[sharky112065]

Lame 

[Insu Dra]

I'm not against a bit of 'harden the f**k up' as far as online speech goes

Sorry can't resist: HTFU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgvM7av1o1Q

[Saturn7]

I don't see what the problem is with accepting bitcoin.

I have a registered company in the UK which is managed by a chartered accountant, and they simply treat bitcoins as shares of a company.

In the same way companies can get shares of another company in exchange for something like intellectual property.

Taxes only come in when you convert bitcoins into cash. In the same way you are charged taxes for shares being sold.

[stevegee58]

Bitcoin is interesting, but I really can't identify with this religious fanaticism that requires companies, organizations etc to either be "true believers" or "heretics".

[Atlas]

Bitcoin is interesting, but I really can't identify with this religious fanaticism that requires companies, organizations etc to either be "true believers" or "heretics".

We just want Bitcoin to survive as long as possible. Corporate hegemony can end things if we let it.

[Sant001]

Isn't this what the Bitcoin Foundation is for?

Hopefully TBF and their lawyers will be able to answer any legal, tax, accounting questions that the EFF or any other big organizations may have about accepting bitcoins.