Should there be a Bitcoin committee that vets Bitcoin service providers?

[CryptoDatabase]

I think it is a bad idea, give any small group an amount of power and we all know where it heads.

And the OP wishes for as large a group as possible, i.e. international scope. He comically cites FIFA and the IEEE, despite the corruption those institutions displayed in the past. Totally bizarre, why would you lust after a model that's proven shaky at best?

Oh not even just modern groups like FIFA which is horribly corrupt. This type of behavior has been around for millenniums and as long as money is involved the chances of corruption goes up 100%.

[7788bitcoin]

No I think we do not need a "centralise" body to vets any bitcoin activities. However, users should use their own judgement when using those services, such as online wallets etc. Such services are easy way to enter bitcoin world but a concerned user should learn about how bitcoin works and eventually responsible of holding his/her own private keys....

[sbtctalk]

Not a bad idea to have an international regulatory body or advisory board to govern responsible use of bitcoins. But the path to it won't be easy.

There will be rival factions for vested interest and a central commission will defeat the idea of centralization.

[MWesterweele]

I think yes and i think it already have now.Posting on this site and gatherin infos from replies is already a commitee,public commitee.Commitee is very important on any things specially on a business.

[StoreBit]

i have personally no experience about this. and not physically know such kind of society. i have hear the news but dont know personally. my such kind of society are present there.

[jonald_fyookball]

This idea came to my mind while I was on my way home.


Bitcoin has spawned new industries and services that benefit consumers. We have services that helps others to buy goods online and allow buyers to pay via BTCs, we also have legit cloud mining services and we also have exchanges that enable us to trade and give new leads for traders. Let's not forget the gambling sites.

But there is no single entity that validates the legitimacy of these service providers. Most of these service providers work anonymously and they hold the risk of running away with your monies, or they could be running vapor ware - i.e: provide bitcoin mining service but in fact it is a ponzi.

Should there be some kind of international consortium that vets through these bitcoin service providers, and possible, visit these provider offices, and the consortium will go through some kind of check list and ultimately give the "stamp of approval" that the bitcoin service provider is in fact legitimate?

Is this idea even feasible? Or am I drunk?

To start off, perhaps someone should verify the existence of cloud mining service operators.

Edit (Add on):

I was thinking along the lines of some formal international based organisation that provides guidelines for bitcoins. In the sports world, there is International Olympic Committee, FIFA (corrupted anyway..). In the computing and engineering world world, there's ISO committees, IEEEs to ensure standards and ethical guidelines to conform to and to oversee the growth of an industry.

Personally I think its a good idea.  Its much better to have market police itself rather than governments and regulators.
One way to do that is through organizations/businesses that review other businesses.

[biggbox]

This idea came to my mind while I was on my way home.


Bitcoin has spawned new industries and services that benefit consumers. We have services that helps others to buy goods online and allow buyers to pay via BTCs, we also have legit cloud mining services and we also have exchanges that enable us to trade and give new leads for traders. Let's not forget the gambling sites.

But there is no single entity that validates the legitimacy of these service providers. Most of these service providers work anonymously and they hold the risk of running away with your monies, or they could be running vapor ware - i.e: provide bitcoin mining service but in fact it is a ponzi.

Should there be some kind of international consortium that vets through these bitcoin service providers, and possible, visit these provider offices, and the consortium will go through some kind of check list and ultimately give the "stamp of approval" that the bitcoin service provider is in fact legitimate?

Is this idea even feasible? Or am I drunk?

To start off, perhaps someone should verify the existence of cloud mining service operators.

Edit (Add on):

I was thinking along the lines of some formal international based organisation that provides guidelines for bitcoins. In the sports world, there is International Olympic Committee, FIFA (corrupted anyway..). In the computing and engineering world world, there's ISO committees, IEEEs to ensure standards and ethical guidelines to conform to and to oversee the growth of an industry.

Personally I think its a good idea.  Its much better to have market police itself rather than governments and regulators.
One way to do that is through organizations/businesses that review other businesses.

I wonder if the co-founders of Bitcoins were ever interested in such an official committee? Or the whole team are too fractured to even sit on the same table? haha

[Red-Apple]

no because they can become biased and don't judge these services and service providers properly and putting so much trust and power in a group of people will create some kind of centralized power that i don't find favorable.

besides there is google available for us for a reason
use it to find feedback and information like their address about any service you want to use.

[Carlton Banks]

Edit (Add on):

I was thinking along the lines of some formal international based organisation that provides guidelines for bitcoins. In the sports world, there is International Olympic Committee, FIFA (corrupted anyway..). In the computing and engineering world world, there's ISO committees, IEEEs to ensure standards and ethical guidelines to conform to and to oversee the growth of an industry.

Personally I think its a good idea.  Its much better to have market police itself rather than governments and regulators.
One way to do that is through organizations/businesses that review other businesses.

No, jonald, you didn't even read the salient part of the OP (quoted). The proposal is to create an international institution with "absolute" authority/monopoly, if not why give examples of exactly such questionable institutions in the edit. You're throwing your lot in with the pseudo-fascists, as is typical of you.

[spazzdla]

Yep. You're communicating with the committee board right now: it's called public opinion. And as an ad hoc committee member, I personally reject the formal organisation of such a committee, and wouldn't accept them as any kind of authority (unless they earned it through whiter-than-white transparency and objectivity, which is unlikely).

Still, if you yourself believe you could be an unbiased arbiter of such an organisation, you should do it yourself. You appear to be suitably motivated.

This, I hope we can push this idea to the masses.

Just like hotel bookings, etc that have ratings.

We could maybe start a "business rating section" or something that would be neat. 

Mr. Theymos?

[Carlton Banks]

Sounds like a job for The Bitcoin Foundation.

Exactly, the last thing Bitcoin needs is even more self-appointed centres of the universe We've got multiple organisations making out like they're "Bitcoin officials" already, yet none of these preening peacocks seem to understand that in order for the to be officials, there has to be an office. And there isn't one; that was always the entire point. Duhhhhhh.

[biggbox]

Sounds like a job for The Bitcoin Foundation.

Did they do anything about all these shady dealings that involved BTCs? i.e: HYIP, Ponzis, "cloud minings"

[ebliever]

There are all sorts of precedents in the world today for accreditation or auditing bodies that are not sanctioned by any government, that play a role in the free market. College accreditation services and corporate audits (TS16141, QS-9000, VDA and so forth) are examples. Corporate customers, families with students, and others in the free market find sufficient value in such services to maintain them, despite the fact that none of them are perfect.

There is an obvious opening in the bitcoin ecosystem for services that provide some form of vetting - the cloud mining topic mentioned is a good example. And I'd rather have such services spring up from the grass roots (and be used or disregarded voluntarily by individual bitcoiners) than have them imposed by governments in response to ongoing scandals in the bitcoin ecosystem.

[sbtctalk]

Sounds like a job for The Bitcoin Foundation.

Did they do anything to improve the overall image of bitcoin?

There is disdain for committees but someone has to start the ball rolling. If there are no self appointed group of experts to start the system, there will not be progress.

Start a system, understand the flaws from other systems and improve your own.

[biggbox]

There are all sorts of precedents in the world today for accreditation or auditing bodies that are not sanctioned by any government, that play a role in the free market. College accreditation services and corporate audits (TS16141, QS-9000, VDA and so forth) are examples. Corporate customers, families with students, and others in the free market find sufficient value in such services to maintain them, despite the fact that none of them are perfect.

There is an obvious opening in the bitcoin ecosystem for services that provide some form of vetting - the cloud mining topic mentioned is a good example. And I'd rather have such services spring up from the grass roots (and be used or disregarded voluntarily by individual bitcoiners) than have them imposed by governments in response to ongoing scandals in the bitcoin ecosystem.

My sensing is that there are mixed feelings about this. I am certain there is an ideological camp who believe strongly in decentralisation and a committee will go contrary to their own beliefs. Another point to note that perhaps the key persons and dev in the BTC community prefers to keep their anonymity.

The image of bitcoin could only be improved through promoting its merits such as its status as a global currency that benefits the global community, instead of being used for ransoms, or used for HYIPs.

[sbtctalk]

There are all sorts of precedents in the world today for accreditation or auditing bodies that are not sanctioned by any government, that play a role in the free market. College accreditation services and corporate audits (TS16141, QS-9000, VDA and so forth) are examples. Corporate customers, families with students, and others in the free market find sufficient value in such services to maintain them, despite the fact that none of them are perfect.

There is an obvious opening in the bitcoin ecosystem for services that provide some form of vetting - the cloud mining topic mentioned is a good example. And I'd rather have such services spring up from the grass roots (and be used or disregarded voluntarily by individual bitcoiners) than have them imposed by governments in response to ongoing scandals in the bitcoin ecosystem.

My sensing is that there are mixed feelings about this. I am certain there is an ideological camp who believe strongly in decentralisation and a committee will go contrary to their own beliefs. Another point to note that perhaps the key persons and dev in the BTC community prefers to keep their anonymity.

The image of bitcoin could only be improved through promoting its merits such as its status as a global currency that benefits the global community, instead of being used for ransoms, or used for HYIPs.

The ideological camp is only a small portion of the global btc users, and another small portion of users who do trading.

I do not want to sound cynical but majority bitcoin users seems to be used for underground operations such as dark markets, ransom ware, ponzis.

I wonder is there a demographic of global bitcoin users.

[biggbox]

Bitcoin users hate to be regulated. But they make a lot of noise when their favourite unregulated exchanges goes bust, and offline.

The latest fiasco, the scam of Hashocean has attracted many new angry users in this forum.

[Carlton Banks]

Bitcoin users hate to be regulated. But they make a lot of noise when their favourite unregulated exchanges goes bust, and offline.

The latest fiasco, the scam of Hashocean has attracted many new angry users in this forum.

Imagine a Venn diagram of Bitcoin users: one circle for those with a libertarian stance on regulations, the other circle with Hashocean vicitims. Guess how much intersection there is?

[countryfree]

If the plan is to raise a bitcoin tax to finance the committee and its work, with a fee to get a license from that authority to anyone offering some kind of BTC service, I'm out of BTC.

Most people cannot trust their government, how could they trust a BTC committee?

[groll]

I agree with you that there must be a committee or a body watching over or regulating the use of bitcoins. In order to increase the security and protection of users this things should be implemented, but since the government have not yet included bitcoin in their policies it is still far from reality. As of now, we must be always cautious in investing and using bitcoins since hackers and scammers are everywhere.