[2016-05-08] Is the Bitcoin Community Being Too Harsh on Gavin Andresen?

[LiteCoinGuy]

Is the Bitcoin Community Being Too Harsh on Gavin Andresen?

Perhaps the biggest casualty of this week’s Satoshi Nakamoto/Craig Wright fiasco has been Gavin Andresen. But has the Bitcoin community been fair to one of its hardest workers?

https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-community-harsh-gavin-andresen/

[1715586558]

1715586558

[1715586558]

1715586558

[1715586558]

1715586558

[Kprawn]

" It was Andresen who in October 2011 first floated the idea of a Bitcoin Foundation to lobby for cryptocurrency and promote the idea of a decentralized transaction network to a world that had never heard of such a concept.

Whatever became of the Bitcoin Foundation that eventuated from that proposal, it’s important to remember the response at the time was generally positive. "

From what I can remember, nobody really wanted the foundation because it just meant that a central figure head could be attacked and the nature of Bitcoin was meant to decentralized.  .. Some

of the board members were also a bit controversial and later turned out to be the biggest scammers in the history of Bitcoin. 

I figure some of the criticism were a bit harsh, but a lot of people still see him as the opposition, since he joined Mike Hearn and then developed Classic to split the community. 

[TraderTimm]

Gavin is more of a liability than an asset.

His track record is rather crappy when you take a close look at it.

Gavin helped found the Bitcoin Foundation, whose primary purpose was to cozy up to government and businesses - oh, and he thought Mark Karpeles was a fine, upstanding member.

Gavin didn't blink an eye when MMMGlobal, the ponzi scammers, were added as a Bitcoin Foundation member.

Gavin publicly vouched for Peter Vessenes as Chairman of the Bitcoin Foundation, who incidentally is accused of embezzling $20,000 along with another charge of taking $5,000,000 from Mt. Gox.

Gavin included Charlie Shrem as a founding member of the Bitcoin Foundation, who was later found to be an enabling actor laundering darknet drug money.

Gavin associated himself with the Bitcoin Unlimited project, and promoted Peter R's work, who incidentally is accused of being a plagiarist.

Gavin promoted the MyBitcoin service as a safe place for new users to put their Bitcoins, which later disappeared, taking all their BTC with them.

Gavin aligned himself and promoted the various schemes of Mike Hearn, who as we all know later turned on Bitcoin and declared it a "Failed Experiment" publicly, after Hearn cozied up to the big banks for his new job.

So, after all of that bullshit, we're supposed to believe that Gavin is a great judge of character and intent?

I say he's a poor judge of people, and a rather shoddy judge of code architecture decisions -- now that he's a glaring security risk, I don't blame them for taking his commit access away. He's a complete whirlwind of a mess.

[Denker]

Is the community to harsh?
Very simple to answer.NO!
What Gavin has done the last 12 months was far away from being good.