Should Peter Vessenes resign as the Executive Director for Bitcoin Foundation ?

[Lethn]

Please just disband the Bitcoin foundation and stop trying to form organisations that claim to represent people when they actually don't, I'm getting sick of this, it's exactly how groups like the Federal Reserve got started and will also be why I diversify into alternative currencies, I will never acknowledge the 'Bitcoin foundation' as any sort of regulatory or representative body of Bitcoin or it's users and do everything to fight against them.

[1715084853]

1715084853

[1715084853]

1715084853

[IIOII]

The Bitcoin Foundation Inc. constitutes a serious risk to Bitcoin's independence that should not be taken lightly.

What they seek is Bitcoin's approval by the establishment by adjusting it to their requirements, which is a severly misguided aim.

The fact that they wish to take control of bitcoin.org raises a huge red flag.

What they exhibit first and foremost is constant usurpation for (more) power. They do not act in the interest of the majority of Bitcoin users - they act as they see fit.

[Chakraball]

There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.

Could you please elaborate on what's disturbing ?

When I saw and read this thread I thought the same as your last post - "They'll probably do a great job and all, but non-profit ?

There's at least 3 major business owners in the board of important people there." -

So I did some searching and what I found prompted me to join the forum to comment, I will PM you shortly Herodes.

Why don't you tell us all?

I am not one to accuse before I am sure of my facts, Herodes is a long standing member and may be able to confirm some things for me and because he started this thread I don't think he will try to deflect my questioning of the foundation.

When I have collated and verified all my info I will post it here.

[Severian]

There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.

It's the first I've heard of it and I'm a lifetime member. Granted, I don't frequent the foundation's forums, so perhaps I'm just out of the loop.

If an email was sent out about this to foundation members, I missed it.

[charleshoskinson]

Please just disband the Bitcoin foundation and stop trying to form organizations that claim to represent people when they actually don't, I'm getting sick of this, it's exactly how groups like the Federal Reserve got started and will also be why I diversify into alternative currencies, I will never acknowledge the 'Bitcoin foundation' as any sort of regulatory or representative body of Bitcoin or it's users and do everything to fight against them.

Well you guys can complain about it or you can help me design and implement my course. The better it becomes; the more people take it and recommend it. If it becomes the entry point into the bitcoin world for the general public, then those who control the course; control the opinions and level of participation for all who learned from it. I want the veterans in this community to step up or you will have to just accept the bitcoin foundation as your defacto leader. The media will give them this title soon enough.

[grubles]

Maybe I'm paranoid, but I don't trust a "foundation" for bitcoin one ounce. I feel it somewhat goes against the principles bitcoin was founded on.

[charleshoskinson]

Here here. Join my class

[benjamindees]

+1 to everyone recognizing that the purpose of a government-sanctioned Bitcoin "foundation" is to centralize and control and sell-out.

[Lethn]

Please just disband the Bitcoin foundation and stop trying to form organizations that claim to represent people when they actually don't, I'm getting sick of this, it's exactly how groups like the Federal Reserve got started and will also be why I diversify into alternative currencies, I will never acknowledge the 'Bitcoin foundation' as any sort of regulatory or representative body of Bitcoin or it's users and do everything to fight against them.

Well you guys can complain about it or you can help me design and implement my course. The better it becomes; the more people take it and recommend it. If it becomes the entry point into the bitcoin world for the general public, then those who control the course; control the opinions and level of participation for all who learned from it. I want the veterans in this community to step up or you will have to just accept the bitcoin foundation as your defacto leader. The media will give them this title soon enough.

You aren't reading my post, I don't give a shit about self-appointed community leaders and organisations, you can want things all you want, doesn't mean you'll get them.

[TimJBenham]

I interpreted this was that they would actually want to regulate how trade is done on the exchanges, which I don't think is a good idea.

This is pretty vague. Is there something in particular you have a problem with?

Yes, if there's an man that's supposed to have the leading role of two enterprises, one or both of these roles can not be fulfilled completely. In my view, if you're the chief of a company, then holding the lead role in a foundation means you can't do a great job at both of them.

Usually it means you're using the foundation as a means to promote your business and lock out competition. The first job generally pays a lot better than the second.

[TimJBenham]

In any case, you would need to make a pretty strong statement of disassociation with BCF to give it any meaning.
The world will see 'Bitcoin Foundation' and think its the singular incarnation of bitcoin.
They have automatically won if there are no voices against it.

They are the Bitcoin Foundation. Unfortunately that means any regulation of Bitcoin which they approve of will be seen as having been done with the support of and after consultation with the Bitcoin community. If a few people pipe up with complaints afterwards then they are just the ranting libertarian/anarchist fringe that the Bitcoin community has "outgrown".

[BCB]

There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.

It's the first I've heard of it and I'm a lifetime member. Granted, I don't frequent the foundation's forums, so perhaps I'm just out of the loop.

If an email was sent out about this to foundation members, I missed it.

See my comments in the article

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/04/22/bitcoin-foundation-expands-global-media-opportunities/

Jon, another great article.

[Dunster]

The issue is really quite simple, just don't vote for Peter Vessenes on the next election pursuant to the by-laws of the foundation. If members are really upset they can vote to impeach him. 

[kerogre256]

What election? have you seen election in corporation ?BITCOIN INC

[Dunster]

My comment on this topic was initially meant more as a joke. However, as I researched the "foundation" it became clear that things are not quite what they appear to be. Other Bitcoiners had concerns about the "foundation" long before me and I now stand with them.

[repentance]

The issue is really quite simple, just don't vote for Peter Vessenes on the next election pursuant to the by-laws of the foundation. If members are really upset they can vote to impeach him. 

If I recall correctly, the current board members have a two year term.  That struck me as a little odd as generally the initial board of a new organisation like this is basically a steering committee and elections of office-bearers from the membership are held reasonably rapidly.

I also seem to recall that they won't be making public how they spend their funds, which is also an odd decision.

[Lethn]

I also seem to recall that they won't be making public how they spend their funds, which is also an odd decision.

They need to maintain their 'independence' from oversight to help them regulate Bitcoin

[k99]

All these elements in the bitcoin eco-system which are not breathing the spirit of decentralisation and p2p are enemies for the project.
That starts with way too dominant exchanges like MtGox, mining pools controlling a large part of the mining power and also touches the problem that the core developer team has a central power (that does not mean any disrespect, but I think that is a problematic situation - at least a potential risk for the future).

So in fact we have something like a central bank (not to control money issueing but we got central power structures).
The bitcoin foundation seems to me just another part in the wrong direction.

Why not use the power in the underlying technology to create a democratic system out of these problematic regions?

Peer2Peer exchanges are in discussion and I hope they become reality soon!

A voting mechanism could be implemented to be used as a tool to find global democratic consensus.
Some ideas like liquid democracy used by the pirate parties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Democracy#Delegated_voting) could be applied. So basically every bitcoin user would have the same voting power (not less then any company paying a gold premium membership). But of course there are situations where he prefers to delegate his vote to someone else who has more expertise. So a fluent delegate system could lead automatically to elected "board members" as well as it could be used as basis for decisions implemented by the core developer team.

I do not say that this process is easy. But I think for the money of the future we need also new structures and not concepts from the last century.

[BitcoinAshley]

Perhaps when he says "we", he means CoinLab. CoinLab might want regulators to come in because regulations give established companies an economic advantage. Too-big-to-fail is the epitome of regulation.

This. Regulation is the enemy of Bitcoin. Regulation won't make volatility go away - volatility will go away on its own once market-makers start getting serious, liquidity develops, super-concentrated positions are diluted, and exchanges get their acts together. We don't need regulation to do these things, but regulation will surely increase centralization and corruption among the already-established bitcoin companies; same thing it has done in every other industry. We don't need a socialist in charge of the Foundation.

Governments need to come to bitcoin on Bitcoin's own terms, not the other way around. And it's our jobs to make our governments realize this - by continuing to use bitcoin in as free a manner as possible. Continuing to navigate our way around the KYC/IRS traps set up for us, and avoiding the companies that could become "too big to fail" thanks to regulatory advantage.

[tvbcof]

Voted 'hell no'.  The guy is making me money, and is my best bet to make a genuine fortune.  Three cheers for ~vess!

Now, how about an update on Coinlab/MtGox for Christsake!