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

[Herodes]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=176921.0

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/bitcoin_anarchy_in_need_of_some_zTFr06G6IWEWYp3OSvJ99L


“We’d be happy to be regulated,” said Vessenes, who also is with the Bitcoin Foundation, an organizing body. “There is no self-regulatory organization for these. It’s pre-regulated right now, but we’re not anti-regulation.”


Who is this guy, flying to Japan, negotiating MtGox into giving up their US and Canadian customer base, and then he goes straight into bed with the authorities, slowly pulling us with the legs into exact the same broken system we're intending to leave ?

It's time for the community to decide what we want. Bitcoin shall not be governed by the US.


Peter Vessenes, how dare he speak for Bitcoin, the decentralized network. If he's happy to be regulated, then he at least should discuss this with the community first. This is really disrespectful towards the community, and it is against the spirit of freedom and lack of regulation that is Bitcoin.


“We’d be happy to be regulated,” said Vessenes

^^ This is the worst thing that man has ever said, I had some hard questions for him earlier on, which he choose to never respond to

He hasn't even posted in this forum since March 19. And ignored a hell of a lot of questions asked to him.

What kind of shady deals are going on in the background here ? Also MtGox is discontinuing USD redeemable codes, or else they would face consequences. Consquences by who, and who delivered the message. I don't like this development at all.

Let us see what the community thinks.

[1714142858]

1714142858

[1714142858]

1714142858

[1714142858]

1714142858

[1714142858]

1714142858

[1714142858]

1714142858

[Etlase2]

You need to realize that there is some distance between regulation of fiat->BTC and vice versa and regulation of bitcoin itself. He is referring entirely to the former, not the latter. You would be silly to not want regulation of the exchanges and such, it is the only real way to bring legitimacy.

[Herodes]

You need to realize that there is some distance between regulation of fiat->BTC and vice versa and regulation of bitcoin itself. He is referring entirely to the former, not the latter. You would be silly to not want regulation of the exchanges and such, it is the only real way to bring legitimacy.

Exchanges need to pay attention to the laws in their jurisdictions, or else they would be unable to operate. But how 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.

[casascius]

I disagree with the claim it's the worst thing he ever said, or that this is even bad.  It sounds like he is doing his job.  Those who find fault with him making a statement like that have a limited view of the way business and politics works.

[Etlase2]

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?

[Severian]

I'm of the opinion that no business interests should be on the foundation's board, especially the guys that run gox and bitinstant.

I'm a lifetime member and I won't have anything to do with the foundation until and unless Karpeles, Shrem and Vessenes are gone.

[Herodes]

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. That is a big problem.

[Herodes]

I disagree with the claim it's the worst thing he ever said, or that this is even bad.  It sounds like he is doing his job.  Those who find fault with him making a statement like that have a limited view of the way business and politics works.

It's the overall impression, I don't trust that guy to want the best for bitcoin. I might be wrong, but that's the impression I've gotten. Look at his history, he's been at max 2 years with every company he's been running. The exchange rate has much volatility, I don't see how one should call for regulations because of that.

[Herodes]

I'm of the opinion that no business interests should be on the foundation's board, especially the guys that run gox and bitinstant.

I'm a lifetime member and I won't have anything to do with the foundation until and unless Karpeles, Shrem and Vessenes are gone.

 I agree with this. Also, the steep fees needed to 'buy in' to the foundation means it's a rich business men club only. I think there's plenty of members in the community that could contribute equally or better that doesn't have millions of dollars on their bank accounts.

[Etlase2]

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. That is a big problem.

The bitcoin universe is still pretty dang small bro, you should be happy that there are people who are willing to spend time and effort to help you make money. If all the business guys resign from the foundation, who will step up to spearhead such things? Programmers? I don't think so.

[Severian]

The bitcoin universe is still pretty dang small bro, you should be happy that there are people who are willing to spend time and effort to help you make money. If all the business guys resign from the foundation, who will step up to spearhead such things? Programmers? I don't think so.

Gox and Bitinstant are alienating many new users. They shouldn't be associated with the foundation.

[Herodes]

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. That is a big problem.

The bitcoin universe is still pretty dang small bro, you should be happy that there are people who are willing to spend time and effort to help you make money. If all the business guys resign from the foundation, who will step up to spearhead such things? Programmers? I don't think so.

If you look at the FSF, Richard Stallman is super dedicated to his cause, to the extent that he for a while slept under his desk when not programming  or doing work for the FSF. He travels all over the world and talks about Free Software. He's not a business person, but he sure has made a name for himself and most geeks now about the FSF, and appreciate what they do. Stallmann is genuine and believes in what he does.

The same kind of person we would need for the Bitcoin Foundation, not a person that's only interested in business. Bitcoin is still small, but not smaller than that any bitcoin business of a certain size can warrant having at least one person working full time at that project. To my understand, for example blockchain.info has one person working full time on it. In a foundation, I'm sure an Executive Director would have his hands full every day if he so choose. Having a demanding full time job outside the Foundation means he is not able to do a great job for the Foundation.

[nonsh]

People who understand markets need to get involved.

NO. PLEASE! HELL! NO! Those guys who fu**ed up the regular markets and never come up with innovations and improvements for citizen should stay home.

[odolvlobo]

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.

[Herodes]

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

From the NY article:

Still, the volatility in the price of bitcoins — rising from about $45 just a month ago to more than $250 this week and back down to around $100 yesterday — has some people questioning if no rules are good rules.

One venture capitalist, who was investing in bitcoin-based startups, said there need to be some rules and order before the currency can take off.

“Right now you have a bunch of anarchistic market dilettantes who don’t understand how markets work and don’t understand the perils of markets,” he said. “People who understand markets need to get involved.”

So, I take it the problem is the volatile market rate. As bitcoin grows, it will become more stable, it's currently growing pains. What exactly would people 'who understands markets' do in regards to the bitcoin market?

[Etlase2]

If you look at the FSF, Richard Stallman is super dedicated to his cause, to the extent that he for a while slept under his desk when not programming  or doing work for the FSF. He travels all over the world and talks about Free Software. He's not a business person, but he sure has made a name for himself and most geeks now about the FSF, and appreciate what they do. Stallmann is genuine and believes in what he does.

Yeah well bitcoin's Stallman decided he wasn't up to the task, so again I ask, who do you think is going to do this? You can't just will a Richard Stallman to exist to help bitcoin.

[Elwar]

Someone else gave an interview a few years ago (Gavin maybe) who said that any regulation should be at the exchange level.

They regulate everything that has to do with their dollars anyway, this is not a huge leap.

[Severian]

“People who understand markets need to get involved.”

How's that working out, Peter? Your flagship has sprung a leak.

[Herodes]

If you look at the FSF, Richard Stallman is super dedicated to his cause, to the extent that he for a while slept under his desk when not programming  or doing work for the FSF. He travels all over the world and talks about Free Software. He's not a business person, but he sure has made a name for himself and most geeks now about the FSF, and appreciate what they do. Stallmann is genuine and believes in what he does.

Yeah well bitcoin's Stallman decided he wasn't up to the task, so again I ask, who do you think is going to do this? You can't just will a Richard Stallman to exist to help bitcoin.

Who ? I'm not sure, perhaps there would be some people interested if the position was made available. A Bitcoin-Stallman would not be bad. 

I am not sure if having the foundation run by the biggest bitcoin business men is the best idea. Perhaps the Foundation should be more independent ?

[aurora]

“We’d be happy to be regulated,” said Vessenes

I hate regulations but I believe bitcoin would be more stable if somebody could regulate it