https://gallery.mailchimp.com/2918be7dc96bb805b1532a71b/files/manifesto_02.pdf?ct=t(Annual_Members_Manifesto_10_25_2016)
I WILL POST ANY FURTHER ANSWERS HERE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Llew,
- You write that one group of people who have not adopted bitcoin during its first six years, because they are so poor that they have no currency at all , will be the first to adopt bitcoin. How old are you?
- You think that offering a bank-independent payment system is “covered in our values” and then you present your appalling argument for not covering it. We are still talking about the 8 preambles.
- The banking/politics maffia´s war against cash is _not_ covered in the preambles or mentioned at all anywhere in the document.
What you do cover is the “losses associated with card fraud” and “lacking security in traditional payment system”. Exactly who´s business is that? Who do you think you´re working for?
Now on to bullet points, where you count seven “rights” for that should not be impeded by “humans”: All of these “rights” (you probably mean “legal options to”) are already present in almost all countries in the world. And in remaining countries, (Russia, is there any more?), bitcoin is thriving outside of the legal system, providing much needed competition to the establishment. Your reasoning behind these bullet points is understandable: With this manifesto, all you need to do to succeed is to put your feet on your desk.
Llew, you are better advised to seek a career in politics or organized crime. There is a vacancy in Hillary Clintons campaign office. If you are eyeing a position at a bank, go apply for it. We are not here to help you with your career. You will be of no use to the bitcoin community.
Carl Lundström
+41 763 262630
From: Llew Claasen [mailto:llew@bitcoinfoundation.org]
Sent: den 29 oktober 2016 13:25
To:
carl@lundstrom.comSubject: Re: Important update for foundation members
Hi Carl
Thanks for your notes.
One of the reasons that we've drafted the manifesto is to ensure that we're clear on what we're trying to do and to be clear on what our members can expect from us. Our manifesto will not ring true for everyone and that is a function of having different philosophies of what Bitcoin should be.
My further comments as follows:
1. Poorest people in the world (ie. in developing markets) are most likely to adopt bitcoin as a currency first, because existing solutions don't serve them. They will be important early adopters on the consumer side.
2. I think this is covered in our values. This is a fight that we can't win in the short term and picking a fighting at that scale right now will just put a big target on bitcoin for regulators. It's precisely this centralized control, surveillance and bullying that will drive adoption of bitcoin.
3. Also covered in the values.
Thanks again & best wishes. Feel free to reach out at any time.
llew
Llew Claasen
Executive Director
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Carl Lundstrom <
carl@lundstrom.com> wrote:
Write above this block to post a reply. [View conversation in MailChimp]
Carl Lundstrom (
carl@lundstrom.com) wrote:
Thanks for reaching out! If the preambles should be there at all, they serve to indicate the purpose or the reason of the whole engagement. I don´t agree with the focus you are demonstrating.
1. The poorest people in the world are mentioned repeatedly, as a main element of our engagement in bitcoin. But please - those people who live on $3,10 per day are those that have, and will have, the least of all people to do with bitcoin. Since you mention no other group of people, your piece implies the opposite. It is commendable to want to work for an increase in bitcoin usage among starving Africans and for an increase in their incomes, but other fora are better suited for that.
2. Secondly you overlook a very large problem that bitcoin is on the way of solving - the fact that the banking system is becoming a worldwide monopoly power, from which not even banks themselves are safe. In 2012, the oldest Swiss bank, Wegelin /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wegelin_%26_Co.> , refused to expose its US resident customers to American authorities. Shortly thereafter, commercial US banks decided to exclude Bank Wegelin from the interbank US dollar market in New York, and threatened with other boycott measures – which made the further business of the bank commercially impossible. The bank still refused to expose its customers and preferred to close shop after nearly 300 years of continuous business. I am sure there are more examples of behind-the-scenes pressure of larger banks on smaller. More often this pressure has the purpose of forcing the smaller banks to throw individual customers out. A company I own part of is regularly evicted from Swiss banks since we work with software for bitcoin. That is the only reason. This perspective is frightening because it aims at the big banks being able to decide who, globally, has access to the banking system and not. This must be seen in combination with the war against cash. In the big cities in Sweden you are not able to buy a sandwich at several large and small restaurant- and hotel chains, without a bank card. Once you are boycotted by the banks, you are really _out_ of society, something which will of course in the future be used not only against bitcoin people but also politically.
3. I mentioned the banks´ war against cash. This is a second factor that makes bitcoin necessary. Banks and politicians work successfully to abolish anonymous money in European countries, where Sweden is the experiment shop. What happens there always spreads, and in Sweden they are well on their way.
All the best,
Carl Lundstrom (
carl@lundstrom.com)
