Kill the Politics forum

[caveden]

Gentlemen!
I like democracy! I LOVE democracy!

I don't. And this isn't a democracy, it is private property. It's up to sirius to decide in the end.

[1714633620]

1714633620

[1714633620]

1714633620

[1714633620]

1714633620

[1714633620]

1714633620

[caveden]

Thermos owns the domain

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

[passerby]

Thermos owns the domain

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

BTW, really, who does, in the end, own bitcoin.org ?

[DukeOfEarl]

As an investor, I find this thread horrifying.  The OP brings up an excellent point and any rational person would have dropped the political forum and replaced it with a merchant forum immediately.  The fact that this wasn't done shows that she is correct in her assessment.

There is no better way to kill an initiative than to marry it with a political idea that the masses find repugnant.  Bitcoin is a great idea, but it's not irreplacable.  Especially now that the way to viral success has been revealed, you can bet that among the various spinoff projects there are quite a few successors being built.  The way for Bitcoin to grow rather than to be replaced is to be as politically agnostic as possible and focus on the merchants.

Moderators here need to step outside, take a breath of fresh air and talk to real people...not those in the same echo chamber.

[wumpus]

There is no better way to kill an initiative than to marry it with a political idea that the masses find repugnant. 

Repugnant or not doesn't really have to do with it. No matter what your political view is, someone is bound to find it repugnant.

IMO the main bitcoin site should be neutral from any political view, repugnant or not. It should be about technical issues, indifferent of the political affiliations of the users.

Do you know what an open source project is? There is no organization behind bitcoin, it has no owners, no official representatives.

No other major open source project I know has any political affiliation, at least on their main site. For example, file sharing tools have the same problem. So they simply say to be about legal file sharing to rid themselves of the same troll discussions all the time.

[Jessy Kang]

Bring on a large number of new moderators and censor anything that makes the project look bad.

If we limited the scope of the forum it would not require additional moderators. Developer talk does not really lend itself to trolling.

Censorship, of any kind, is a slippery slope. Jessy Kang, you know that
better than most.

A tightly focused board, would by definition need to be tightly moderated. I don't have a problem with that. Here it's the Wild West *unless* a mod is OCD, bored, disagrees- then they start stabbing wildly at the admin keys. If it were limited to development and technical issues it would not really a problem. The only reason I still use this forum ID is for continuity, if we ever make any mainstream progress obviously it, and any Adult links would be the first things to put on the chopping block.

Do you know what an open source project is?

Gosh no sir- it all sounds very complicated! All this is pretty far over my head- appreciate the patience with lil' ole' me.

There is no organization behind bitcoin, it has no owners, no official representatives. Bitcoin.org is only a site which has been used by all to discuss and evolve the project, and it is not hostage to anyone.

Yes, I understand that is the narrative- you understand that based on the available evidence that it is not actually true in practical terms? 

So:
Openoffice.org Official OpenOffice website.
Redcross.org Official Red Cross website.
Mozilla.org: Official Mozilla website.
Wikipedia.org: Official Wikipedia website.
Bitcoin.org (copyright "Bitcoin Project 2009-2011"): NOT the Official Bitcoin Project website.

I'm sure that's obvious to everyone who visits here right?

So lets quit the "It's not the official site" crap and not rewrite the English language- because if it's not the official site, by any reasonable standard it should be and that means someone is domain squatting and using it for other than it's widely recognized purpose.

A single individual controls the domain, a single one runs the forum, there are names on the front of the site that all but the most hairsplitting would consider "official", there are people being represented by the media as "official" giving interviews with the press and government- not just for their software client, but for Bitcoin as a whole, they are determining Bitcoin policy- and all these people all belong to one small core group which is the de facto Bitcoin decision making body.

That's kind of an organization if you... I don't know, check a dictionary or something crazy like that- and trying to claim otherwise reeks of desperation.

I don't. And this isn't a democracy, it is private property. It's up to sirius to decide in the end.

Wait...whut? You just said a minute ago it's not "hostage to anyone"?

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

IRC indicates Thermos owns (or at least controls) the domain, Sirus owns the server. You have evidence otherwise it would be good to have it out there in the public record. No disinfectant like sunlight and all that.

Bitcoin doesn't need to be used by large corporations like Walmart and Amazon to be successful.

Yeah it does. Because if THEY can't use it, you think they are going to let thousands of smaller retailers undercut their prices with their lower transactional overhead? Nope, they'll dial up their lobbyists and that will be that.

Bitcoin gives anyone who wants to use it an alternative to centrally controlled currencies. It is an opportunity for more freedom.

Money is money, the people who are better at making it, will always be better at making it. Every attempt throughout history to artificially level the playing field has failed. I should know, I come from a country that tried, and learned better. There is no magic legislation, manifesto or computer code that will give you what you think you deserve. A lot of people have been sold on a Bitcoin fairy tale that is just not going to come true.

[JohnDoe]

There's currently a push to split these forums off from bitcoin.org and move them to their own domain:

http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2011/06/15/2#l1062161 (starting at 3:28)

As one of the anarchist lunatics, I really wish that my fellow crazies would take Jessy Kang's advice.  Bitcoin will benefit the anarchist project merely by continuing to exist and grow.  There's no need to jeopardize that by trying to shove our ideology down the throats of the normals.

As a psychopath anarchist, I converted to this position too. I find myself caring more about new infrastructure and the price of BTC/NMC than trying to push my philosophy nowadays, and as you say, why would I want to waste my time trying to push anarchism if the mere continued rise of Bitcoin makes my dreams ever closer to realization?

I guess this is my official endorsement of Jeff Garzik and all the walled garden people.

[TradersEdgeDice]

Bring on a large number of new moderators and censor anything that makes the project look bad.

If we limited the scope of the forum it would not require additional moderators. Developer talk does not really lend itself to trolling.

Censorship, of any kind, is a slippery slope. Jessy Kang, you know that
better than most.

A tightly focused board, would by definition need to be tightly moderated. I don't have a problem with that. Here it's the Wild West *unless* a mod is OCD, bored, disagrees- then they start stabbing wildly at the admin keys. If it were limited to development and technical issues it would not really a problem. The only reason I still use this forum ID is for continuity, if we ever make any mainstream progress obviously it, and any Adult links would be the first things to put on the chopping block.

Do you know what an open source project is?

Gosh no sir- it all sounds very complicated! All this is pretty far over my head- appreciate the patience with lil' ole' me.

There is no organization behind bitcoin, it has no owners, no official representatives. Bitcoin.org is only a site which has been used by all to discuss and evolve the project, and it is not hostage to anyone.

Yes, I understand that is the narrative- you understand that based on the available evidence that it is not actually true in practical terms? 

So:
Openoffice.org Official OpenOffice website.
Redcross.org Official Red Cross website.
Mozilla.org: Official Mozilla website.
Wikipedia.org: Official Wikipedia website.
Bitcoin.org (copyright "Bitcoin Project 2009-2011"): NOT the Official Bitcoin Project website.

I'm sure that's obvious to everyone who visits here right?

So lets quit the "It's not the official site" crap and not rewrite the English language- because if it's not the official site, by any reasonable standard it should be and that means someone is domain squatting and using it for other than it's widely recognized purpose.

A single individual controls the domain, a single one runs the forum, there are names on the front of the site that all but the most hairsplitting would consider "official", there are people being represented by the media as "official" giving interviews with the press and government- not just for their software client, but for Bitcoin as a whole, they are determining Bitcoin policy- and all these people all belong to one small core group which is the de facto Bitcoin decision making body.

That's kind of an organization if you... I don't know, check a dictionary or something crazy like that- and trying to claim otherwise reeks of desperation.

I don't. And this isn't a democracy, it is private property. It's up to sirius to decide in the end.

Wait...whut? You just said a minute ago it's not "hostage to anyone"?

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

IRC indicates Thermos owns (or at least controls) the domain, Sirus owns the server. You have evidence otherwise it would be good to have it out there in the public record. No disinfectant like sunlight and all that.

Bitcoin doesn't need to be used by large corporations like Walmart and Amazon to be successful.

Yeah it does. Because if THEY can't use it, you think they are going to let thousands of smaller retailers undercut their prices with their lower transactional overhead? Nope, they'll dial up their lobbyists and that will be that.

Bitcoin gives anyone who wants to use it an alternative to centrally controlled currencies. It is an opportunity for more freedom.

Money is money, the people who are better at making it, will always be better at making it. Every attempt throughout history to artificially level the playing field has failed. I should know, I come from a country that tried, and learned better. There is no magic legislation, manifesto or computer code that will give you what you think you deserve. A lot of people have been sold on a Bitcoin fairy tale that is just not going to come true.

+1

[theymos]

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

Satoshi owns the domain. Sirius owns the server. Gavin and I have access to the server.

Clearly I am not any kind of "ultimate authority" of bitcoin.org. I am using the tools I have been given in ways that I think are good. I'm not going to do anything I consider I bad idea...

[SgtSpike]

Afaik, it's sirius who owns bitcoin.org, not theymos.

Satoshi owns the domain. Sirius owns the server. Gavin and I have access to the server.

Clearly I am not any kind of "ultimate authority" of bitcoin.org. I am using the tools I have been given in ways that I think are good. I'm not going to do anything I consider I bad idea...

Perhaps you, Sirius, Gavin, and Satoshi should have a discussion about this.  It seems pretty obvious that the community wants to rid the site of the politics subforum, so why not comply?  I know you don't think it's a bad idea, but when there are already proven cases of people refusing to use Bitcoins because of what they have seen posted in the politics subforum, how can you ignore that?  Don't you strive to see Bitcoins being used for more and more economic activity around the world?

[TradersEdgeDice]

So:
Openoffice.org Official OpenOffice website.
Mozilla.org: Official Mozilla website.
Wikipedia.org: Official Wikipedia website.

Those websites are operated by foundations with million dollar budgets from major corporate sponsors like Google and Sun (now Oracle). Each foundation has a single direction as decided by their board and they have paid staff that allow them to move in that direction. The foundations are not the communities - they are part of the communities.

It will take Bitcoin many years to reach the same level of maturity as the listed open source projects. Feel free to contribute towards making that happen ;-) If no one does, then it just won't happen and a Bitcoin Foundation with a major budget would be a good thing in my opinion.

Casper

There are a bunch of people with enough coins to do that today.

What is holding them back?

Seriously.  If it's not a scam, back it up with lobbyists.  That's where they are there for--to protect your interests in spite of law, sanity or reality.

[Anonymous]

I missed the part on what this foundation will accomplish besides destroying any fringe discussion on the forums.

[TradersEdgeDice]

I missed the part on what this foundation will accomplish besides destroying any fringe discussion on the forums.

+1 You're right.  That's off topic and requires another thread.

[SgtSpike]

I missed the part on what this foundation will accomplish besides destroying any fringe discussion on the forums.

It's like the government... it expands to raise funds, so it can expand to raise more funds.

[caveden]

Yes, I understand that is the narrative- you understand that based on the available evidence that it is not actually true in practical terms? 

So:
Openoffice.org Official OpenOffice website.
Redcross.org Official Red Cross website.
Mozilla.org: Official Mozilla website.
Wikipedia.org: Official Wikipedia website.

hehehe, it's quite ironic that you cite Wikipedia.org. I don't know any site with more heated political debates than wikipedia! They are all over the site. And yet that doesn't make, afaik, people judge the whole encyclopedia by the political opinions of those who they see discussing there.

And talking about being official sites, all these sites you mention have organizations behind them, like the Mozilla foundation or the Wikimedia foundation. Although you still cannot rigorously talk about an "official firefox project decision", you can pretty much talk about an "official Mozilla foundation decision on firefox development", and that's what you'll see reflected on mozilla.org.
Now, for bitcoin, there's no actual institution behind it. Its organization is entirely spontaneous. It really doesn't make much sense to take the political debates in this forum as an "official position" of the "bitcoin project" or anything alike. Honestly, I find it ... how can I say... a quite poor discernment, at the very least.


I agree that the forum has become impossible to follow, and many silly political discussions have their share on that. But I'd be satisfied with better ways to filter the content that you want, like, for ex., when you click "show unread threads", it would be nice to be able to filter out entire categories.

Anyways, it's not up to me to decide anything, just giving my opinion.

because if it's not the official site, by any reasonable standard it should be and that means someone is domain squatting and using it for other than it's widely recognized purpose.

Please, nobody is squatting anything. Individuals maintain this site, with all its infrastructure, for us to use freely. They don't charge anyone anything, neither ask donations. At least be decent enough to recognize their generous contribution instead of attacking them like that.

I don't. And this isn't a democracy, it is private property. It's up to sirius to decide in the end.

Wait...whut? You just said a minute ago it's not "hostage to anyone"?

Now legitimately owning something is the same of taking it hostage?

[benjamindees]

There's a lot of confusion in this thread.

A Merchant subforum is a good idea.

But, ultimately, these are the facts.  Bitcoin has enough innate advantages to grow slowly and surely even without catering to established merchants.  Turning it into just another Paypal alternative, however, will kill the project dead in it's tracks.

The Politics subforum isn't highly-trafficked anyways.  I question the narrative that is being presented here, that merchants were turned off by it.  The political implications of Bitcoin are fairly obvious.  This just sounds more like an excuse frankly.  And the proposed solution, quelling political speech, wouldn't really solve that problem.

Really we should also consider the possibility that anyone who can't handle the political implications of distributed digital currency is more of a liability than an asset.

[SgtSpike]

There's a lot of confusion in this thread.

A Merchant subforum is a good idea.

But, ultimately, these are the facts.  Bitcoin has enough innate advantages to grow slowly and surely even without catering to established merchants.  Turning it into just another Paypal alternative, however, will kill the project dead in it's tracks.

The Politics subforum isn't highly-trafficked anyways.  I question the narrative that is being presented here, that merchants were turned off by it.  The political implications of Bitcoin are fairly obvious.  This just sounds more like an excuse frankly.  And the proposed solution, quelling political speech, wouldn't really solve that problem.

Really we should also consider the possibility that anyone who can't handle the political implications of distributed digital currency is more of a liability than an asset.

Then you're vastly limiting the potential of Bitcoins.

Many of the people I know wouldn't touch Bitcoins with a 10 foot pole because of how it has been associated in the media with Silk Road and other underground activities.  If they were able to brush past that, but in trying to learn more about bitcoins ended up here, and started reading about all the "down with the government" posts, I can guarantee you that they would be out of here faster than... something fast.

You can call them a liability all you want.  But a very high majority of people will not get involved in something that is so fringe as to call for the abolition of governments.  And unless we figure out a way to cater to the majority, Bitcoin will never last as anything but a fringe project.

[benjamindees]

Frankly, most people don't have the slightest clue about anything.  They're all perfectly happy to use cash laced with cocaine and banks that cater to violent cartels and to purchase prescription drugs from pharmaceutical companies that kill more people than any illicit drug ever has.

The entire point of currency, let alone a de-centralized apolitical currency like Bitcoin, is that it isn't a popularity contest and its value isn't even remotely connected with the number of people who approve of it because of whatever stories the media has told them.

One of the major themes of the Politics subforum, for anyone who actually reads it, is that so-called "anarchists" actually aren't.  Most of them are actually quite interested in functional government.  And the use and promotion of an apolitical, non-inflationary grass-roots currency is actually more an act of "government" than all the ridiculous nonsense carried out by existing "governments" through force and fraud and blatantly stolen resources.

Silk Road is arguably one of the safest drug delivery systems ever devised, including licensed, government-regulated medical doctors who accidentally kill hundreds of thousands of people every year.

And since one of the founding principles of the US government, at least, is the right to freedom of speech and accountability to the average person, this entire proposal reeks more of oriental despotism than a defense of rational government.

So, no, I'm not buying it.  And I've yet to see evidence of a coherent argument that the dumb masses will buy into Bitcoin either, if only it were neutered and taxed and regulated and marketed in just the right way so as to make it completely indistinguishable from any of a dozen existing alternatives.

All I see here is a bunch of intellectual whores pushing a very short-sighted agenda.

[wumpus]

Frankly, most people don't have the slightest clue about anything.  They're all perfectly happy to use cash laced with cocaine and banks that cater to violent cartels and to purchase prescription drugs from pharmaceutical companies that kill more people than any illicit drug ever has.

You're arguing against a strawman. No one of us is claiming anything about drugs, or that it's wrong, or blabla. Personally I live in a country that is very liberal on drugs. But that's not the point.

The point is that a more focused 'official' support forum, that's not a troll sesspool, would be more useful and less obscure to new users. I have no problem with the forum in this form to keep on existing but it should not be the official one linked from bitcoin.org.

All I see here is a bunch of intellectual whores pushing a very short-sighted agenda.

Uh, is that a compliment or an ad hominem attack? Confusing, I cannot decide

[lemonginger]

Silk Road is arguably one of the safest drug delivery systems ever devised, including licensed, government-regulated medical doctors who accidentally kill hundreds of thousands of people every year.

See I agree with this

And since one of the founding principles of the US government, at least, is the right to freedom of speech and accountability to the average person, this entire proposal reeks more of oriental despotism than a defense of rational government.

This is more than a little bit racist. The US has a pretty high market share of the evil despots dept

All I see here is a bunch of intellectual whores pushing a very short-sighted agenda.

And that's just dumb/mean

You can want bitcoin to succeed for purely political reasons, and still not think that all the other BS on these forums is useful on /these/ forums. Little illegal ponzi schemes, unlicensed lottoes, dick waving contests, ideological purity arguments, etc etc etc -- all well and fine on some forum, but not the bitcoin.org forum -- let there be a place that can be purely dedicated to the development and use of the product from a developer/merchant perspective and let twenty other sites take up the slack of all the other discussions.

When I go to drupal.org, it's to figure out why I'm getting a bug with a certain module or what the current status of the debate about including feature foo in core is, not to have discussions about whether taxation is moral or whether bill gates is evil or whatever else