Satoshi Roundtable Retreat - 70 top Techies & CEOs - What should be covered?

[Gleb Gamow]

Bruce, have known Sir Richard Branson, owner of Necker Island hosting the Roundtable, longer than ten years? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TjeyzsUmTs&feature=youtu.be&t=133

[hdbuck]

Bruce, have known Sir Richard Branson, owner of Necker Island hosting the Roundtable, longer than ten years? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TjeyzsUmTs&feature=youtu.be&t=133

small world that of freemasonry.

anyway, bruce, how about you piss off and stop highjacking satoshi's name for your toga parties?

[Gleb Gamow]

http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/all-in-exclusive-with-ahmed-mohamed-526948931844

Let me tell you about a story of a 14-year-old lad who over one weekend took apart an 80's LED clock, then reassembled it into inside a pencil case. He took his "invention" to school where he was arrested. The media and the lad continued to call it an "invention" with even POTUS Obama inviting him to the White House with his "invention" in tow because nobody in the White House was tech savvy enough to realize the newly assembled clock innards were of 80's technology, or they did know but that would ruin their agenda-advancing opportunity. While still donning the same shirt with NASA on it seen in his arrest photo that his sister took at school (but the lad's parents weren't aware of his arrest till after the lad was able to call from the police station - bad sister!), the lad was making the rounds on myriad TV shows talking about his "invention" with the major tech companies offering him positions down the road, they, too, fully unaware the "invention" wasn't an invention at all, but an electronic "rat rod", perhaps because 80's tech looks so similar to 2015 tech. Even MIT was kowtowing the lad. Meanwhile, moreover, after the ruse was exposed, a Bitcoiner offered a quarter of a million dollars toward his education if he and his family moved to Massachusetts so that the lad could attend a well-to-do school where the Bitcoiner once attended.

Hope you enjoyed the story.

[Carlton Banks]

Whether he is guilty or not, no one should have to respond to that level of general vagueness in your accusations, and maybe if you provided some evidence... but that doesn't mean that you are on topic in this particular thread to suggest that either a guest or an organizer of a meeting lacks credibility in a variety of ways..

He responded anyway despite your ethical stipulations, and his response was to confirm what I said. These are nasty, subversive people without compare, responsible for multiple genocides, and your response is "off-topic"? Ok.

Actually, I had given you some benefit of the doubt and I thought that you may have been bringing up aspects of Bruce's role in the bitcoin foundation... but instead freemasonry?  Wat dee fuq?

Regarding Bruce's choice to respond to you, it seems that I have a much bigger grievance than you, because so far he has not even responded or addressed my earlier posts, so possibly he enjoys distracting and quasi-irrelevant topics that you seem to be attempting to bring to the table and emphasize?

Ok, so according to you, the concept of Freemasonry is somehow ridiculous, and yet Bruce saw the need to defend himself multiple times, despite how the lack of merit. Interesting, no? Surely ridiculous accusations deserve no response?

O.k.  It appears that you have some issues with the bitcoin foundation (and surely, there are a lot of people who have various issues with that organization) and even if a large number of those issues are legit, such as whether they spent money wisely, etc. etc., those still seem to be a bit off topic, when the discussion here seems to be asking for input for an upcoming meeting regarding governance and/or scaleability and/or a road map forward.

So, no discussions about the organisation itself should be permitted, only discussion about how the organisation is organised? right.

I think that there can be various discussions regarding motivations of people in the context of the main substance, and apparently, there are a variety of stakeholders invited to the upcoming meeting.

Sure, I will take with a grain of salt if one person is representing that the selection of persons attending the meeting is broadly representative, and if there are problems with the attendees, then there could be problems regarding the level of persuasiveness of any agreements and/or resolutions that they might reach.

What happens when the attendees take a view that is radically different from the Core dev team's developmental roadmap?

Nothing. These people have no business making any design decisions on a project they do not run. Finished. Do you understand?

[Carlton Banks]

Bruce, have known Sir Richard Branson, owner of Necker Island hosting the Roundtable, longer than ten years? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TjeyzsUmTs&feature=youtu.be&t=133

small world that of freemasonry.

anyway, bruce, how about you piss off and stop highjacking satoshi's name for your toga parties?

I understand that Richard Branson's name is one of many that appears on the aircraft manifests of billionaire child pimp to the rich and famous, Jeffrey Epstein (one of Richard's neighbours in the world of private Caribbean islands)


Nice friends you got there, Bruce

[Denker]

A person who has absolutely no scruples to invite scammers like Marshall Long seems to be very suspicious himself in my opinion.
Fish rots from the head it is said.Think about it!

[bargainbin]

[JayJuanGee]

Whether he is guilty or not, no one should have to respond to that level of general vagueness in your accusations, and maybe if you provided some evidence... but that doesn't mean that you are on topic in this particular thread to suggest that either a guest or an organizer of a meeting lacks credibility in a variety of ways..

He responded anyway despite your ethical stipulations, and his response was to confirm what I said. These are nasty, subversive people without compare, responsible for multiple genocides, and your response is "off-topic"? Ok.

Actually, I had given you some benefit of the doubt and I thought that you may have been bringing up aspects of Bruce's role in the bitcoin foundation... but instead freemasonry?  Wat dee fuq?

Regarding Bruce's choice to respond to you, it seems that I have a much bigger grievance than you, because so far he has not even responded or addressed my earlier posts, so possibly he enjoys distracting and quasi-irrelevant topics that you seem to be attempting to bring to the table and emphasize?

Ok, so according to you, the concept of Freemasonry is somehow ridiculous, and yet Bruce saw the need to defend himself multiple times, despite how the lack of merit. Interesting, no? Surely ridiculous accusations deserve no response?

I think that I may have already described some of my objections to your approach and your raising of the topic, and it seems to be that you are a piss poor explainer.

You come out all guns in a blaze, and you don't even explain what the fuck you are talking about, and then you subsequently, attempt to explain and to suggest the fact that Bruce responded to some of your lame and vague accusations as being some kind of meaningful admission that justifies your initial ridiculously vague and unsubstantiated assertions.

Surely, it could be possible that you have a good case, and there possibly could be some decent reason why Bruce's various affiliations may call into question his integrity and credibility; however, your approach comes off way more as an ad hominem attack rather than any meaningful attempt to engage with various substantive issues that are presented in this thread.

O.k.  It appears that you have some issues with the bitcoin foundation (and surely, there are a lot of people who have various issues with that organization) and even if a large number of those issues are legit, such as whether they spent money wisely, etc. etc., those still seem to be a bit off topic, when the discussion here seems to be asking for input for an upcoming meeting regarding governance and/or scaleability and/or a road map forward.

So, no discussions about the organisation itself should be permitted, only discussion about how the organisation is organised? right.

I think that there can be various discussions regarding motivations of people in the context of the main substance, and apparently, there are a variety of stakeholders invited to the upcoming meeting.

Sure, I will take with a grain of salt if one person is representing that the selection of persons attending the meeting is broadly representative, and if there are problems with the attendees, then there could be problems regarding the level of persuasiveness of any agreements and/or resolutions that they might reach.

What happens when the attendees take a view that is radically different from the Core dev team's developmental roadmap?

Any group can get together and make recommendations, and the extent to which they have credible participants and valid points would likely factor into how much persuasive ability or evidence that is mustered up for their various recommendations.. whether those are called recommendations, "proposed map forward" or some other outcomes of such a meeting(s).

Nothing. These people have no business making any design decisions on a project they do not run. Finished. Do you understand?

Yes, if they have little to no credibility or ability to present or persuade regarding their "recommendations", then I suppose those recommendations would get very little weight.  I don't think that you are the one to unilaterally decide how much credibility or weight that their potential meeting should have before it even takes place.  Do you think that you should be given some kind of determination to decide those kinds of issues or someone else or some other group?  What is your suggestion exactly?  If these folks are going to meet anyhow, whether you agree or not, do you have any suggestions for them, or do you prefer that they just don't meet or that they just don't attempt to communicate about it?  Your position is quite unclear and appears to be even internally contradictory.

[Carlton Banks]

Your position is quite unclear and appears to be even internally contradictory.

I guess my position is that it's futile, that was pretty clear. Are you still trying to present the case for people that don't write the code to write the code? 

[JayJuanGee]

Your position is quite unclear and appears to be even internally contradictory.

I guess my position is that it's futile, that was pretty clear. Are you still trying to present the case for people that don't write the code to write the code? 

Nope... I am not trying to defend Bruce at all.  Bruce can defend himself, if he so chooses.

I am merely pointing out that you have the burden to outline relevance and to make any necessary connections with decent evidence (while not getting too far afield) and in essence, you failed to prove much if any aspect of your supposed case in terms of your presentation and possible substance and the inflammatory distractions inside whatever lame content that you did present.

[Carlton Banks]

Nope... I am not trying to defend Bruce at all.  Bruce can defend himself, if he so chooses.

I am merely pointing out that you have the burden to outline relevance and to make any necessary connections with decent evidence (while not getting too far afield) and in essence, you failed to prove much if any aspect of your supposed case in terms of your presentation and possible substance and the inflammatory distractions inside whatever lame content that you did present.

You literally didn't spend a single sentence talking about that, and you did write several paragraphs with something that sidled around presenting a case for Bruce's party at Sir Richard's carribean island, but never quite said it. Are you always so vague and meandering in all your own appraisals and diatribes equally, as I believe I was being quite to the point by simply stating that Bruce Fenton is a proud member of an organisation primarily associated with gangsterism.

[JayJuanGee]

Nope... I am not trying to defend Bruce at all.  Bruce can defend himself, if he so chooses.

I am merely pointing out that you have the burden to outline relevance and to make any necessary connections with decent evidence (while not getting too far afield) and in essence, you failed to prove much if any aspect of your supposed case in terms of your presentation and possible substance and the inflammatory distractions inside whatever lame content that you did present.

You literally didn't spend a single sentence talking about that, and you did write several paragraphs with something that sidled around presenting a case for Bruce's party at Sir Richard's carribean island, but never quite said it. Are you always so vague and meandering in all your own appraisals and diatribes equally, as I believe I was being quite to the point by simply stating that Bruce Fenton is a proud member of an organisation primarily associated with gangsterism.

Yes...

It's called reading comprehension, so hopefully, you can work on that a little bit..

I understand that you understand basic black and white concepts, such as Carlton good and Bruce bad, but bitcoin and its various relationships are much more subtle than your supposed simplified black and white attempt at depiction.

[Carlton Banks]

Not making value judgements, just relaying information. If you believe that freemasons aren't an invidious, violent, pathologically controlling organisation then that's up to you. It's not universal that those qualities are reviled, but I guess you can choose your morals in much the same way as your allegiances.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Not making value judgements, just relaying information. If you believe that freemasons aren't an invidious, violent, pathologically controlling organisation then that's up to you. It's not universal that those qualities are reviled, but I guess you can choose your morals in much the same way as your allegiances.

Honestly brother, I respect your skeptical anti-Freemasonry. I don't know what kind of books you've been reading; I guess it wouldn't surprise me if Freemasons really did have an invidious [good word] past. But my Grandfather was a Freemason. The man was a butcher! I'm pretty sure it was a harmless sausage party.

But there were no private islands.

[Gleb Gamow]

Not making value judgements, just relaying information. If you believe that freemasons aren't an invidious, violent, pathologically controlling organisation then that's up to you. It's not universal that those qualities are reviled, but I guess you can choose your morals in much the same way as your allegiances.

Honestly brother, I respect your skeptical anti-Freemasonry. I don't know what kind of books you've been reading; I guess it wouldn't surprise me if Freemasons really did have an invidious [good word] past. But my Grandfather was a Freemason. The man was a butcher! I'm pretty sure it was a harmless sausage party.

But there were no private islands.

Joshua Zipkin of AMT is a Freemason.
John MacPherson AKA Horus of Cryptsy is a Freemason.

A good man I know here in Sandwich, IL, got the local serial liar (which said good man was well aware of, for he, too, joked at said liar's expense when dude wasn't present) to become a Freemason. BTW, the new Freemason is still the local serial liar - nothing changed except his stories became bigger, including how he (supposedly unknown to others) is fastly advancing through the ranks (leveling up) sharing supposed Masonic secrets while holding court at the local restaurant with the yokels.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Not making value judgements, just relaying information. If you believe that freemasons aren't an invidious, violent, pathologically controlling organisation then that's up to you. It's not universal that those qualities are reviled, but I guess you can choose your morals in much the same way as your allegiances.

Honestly brother, I respect your skeptical anti-Freemasonry. I don't know what kind of books you've been reading; I guess it wouldn't surprise me if Freemasons really did have an invidious [good word] past. But my Grandfather was a Freemason. The man was a butcher! I'm pretty sure it was a harmless sausage party.

But there were no private islands.

Joshua Zipkin of AMT is a Freemason.
John MacPherson AKA Horus of Cryptsy is a Freemason.

A good man I know here in Sandwich, IL, got the local serial liar (which said good man was well aware of, for he, too, joked at said liar's expense when dude wasn't present) to become a Freemason. BTW, the new Freemason is still the local serial liar - nothing changed except his stories became bigger, including how he (supposedly unknown to others) is fastly advancing through the ranks (leveling up) sharing supposed Masonic secrets while holding court at the local restaurant with the yokels.

Sounds moronic. But still harmless. IDK. Tell me he's a Scientologist I'll laugh my ass off. But it doesn't surprise me that a corporate type like Bruce should be a member of an outlandish mens club. It's probably good for business.

[Gleb Gamow]

https://www.facebook.com/bruce.fenton.page/posts/10153049785653001

Wow! Looks like Michael Toth isn't up to speed that Bruce has scaled back his participation to monthly pancake breakfasts.

[RocketSingh]

What do you think should be covered?

A well defined process to reach Consensus in Bitcoin world.


What document(s) would be a good goal?

Bitcoin Constitution. Discussion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373985.0

This is definitely an awesome proposal. But, I doubt they'll discuss it at round-table, unless it is discussed thoroughly among dev community.

[bargainbin]

Not making value judgements, just relaying information. If you believe that freemasons aren't an invidious, violent, pathologically controlling organisation then that's up to you. It's not universal that those qualities are reviled, but I guess you can choose your morals in much the same way as your allegiances.

Honestly brother, I respect your skeptical anti-Freemasonry. I don't know what kind of books you've been reading; I guess it wouldn't surprise me if Freemasons really did have an invidious [good word] past. But my Grandfather was a Freemason. The man was a butcher! I'm pretty sure it was a harmless sausage party.

But there were no private islands.

Joshua Zipkin of AMT is a Freemason.
John MacPherson AKA Horus of Cryptsy is a Freemason.

A good man I know here in Sandwich, IL, got the local serial liar (which said good man was well aware of, for he, too, joked at said liar's expense when dude wasn't present) to become a Freemason. BTW, the new Freemason is still the local serial liar - nothing changed except his stories became bigger, including how he (supposedly unknown to others) is fastly advancing through the ranks (leveling up) sharing supposed Masonic secrets while holding court at the local restaurant with the yokels.

Yeah, I they were both Godless atheists too. But not Communists.
Which conclusively proves that you can always trust a Communist.

P.S. Though it is a fact that Freemasons eat babies & have secs up the butt. That just ain't right.

[Denker]

Chris Derose and Junseth from Bitcoin Uncensored will broadcast live from the Satoshi Roundtable!
So if you are interested --> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/47xl15/bitcoin_uncensored_at_the_satoshi_roundtable_live/

https://plus.google.com/events/cq4vj4n6ogqa7stsufh32rq1vkc?hl=en

Bruce Fenton is not amused.But hey, who gives a **ck right!