Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream

[Frozenlock]

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

Luke, you are just being trolly now.
Even a caricature of a dictator wouldn't say that.

[justusranvier]

Even a caricature of a dictator wouldn't say that.

That's actually how people like that think. If you really want to see how deep the evil goes, just ask him about that enormous implied assumption in his statement. Try to get a straight answer as to precisely why anyone should obey in the first place, and even if that can be demonstrated, what's the exact difference between the people who should be obeyed and those who should not be obeyed.

[tvbcof]

 Since I find your bizarre assertion that everything which effect you negatively is 'violence' amusing, that means that I Love Big Brother.

No, dipshit. This is violence:
...

Funny how you are now embracing the OWS people.  Libertarians had nothing but scorn and derision for these folks when they would not, en mass, move to you favorite crypto-currency solution.  (I don't remember you in particular, but that was my strong sense from the more hard-core Libertarians when this stuff was going down.)

BTW, you think that somehow BTC holders and not going to use 'violence' against the poor saps who didn't get them some back in the day?  I fail to see a particularly big distinction between Bitcoin and any other form of wealth in this respect frankly.  The only real distinction I can see is that Bitcoin has (and will probably lose) the potential for the 'have not's to use 'violence' right back.

[Severian]

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

If you're obedient just because you like to be, that's your problem.

I hear you're a Christian. You do know that when Jesus said "Render unto Caesar...", what he was actually saying was the nothing is Caesar's and we don't owe anything to the government.

I say that only because some Christians get confused and think the suggestion was that Caesar should get taxes. Far from it.

[Luke-Jr]

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

If you're obedient just because you like to be, that's your problem.

I hear you're a Christian. You do know that when Jesus said "Render unto Caesar...", what he was actually saying was the nothing is Caesar's and we don't owe anything to the government.

I say that only because some Christians get confused and think the suggestion was that Caesar should get taxes. Far from it.

Your misinterpretation is crazy, and contrary to the infallible teaching magisterium of the Church:

(bold mine)

✝*Then the Pharisees departing, consulted among themselves for to entrap him in his talk. ✝And they send to him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art a true speaker, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man. for thou dost not respect the person of men. ✝Tell us therefore what is thy opinion, is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? ✝But JESUS knowing their naughtiness, said: What do you tempt me, Hypocrites? ✝Show me the tribute coin. And they offered him a penny. ✝And JESUS saith to them; Whose is this image and inscription? ✝They say to him: Caesar's. Then he saith to them, Render therefore the things that are Caesar's to *Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God.

21. To Caesar.] Temporal duties and payments exacted by worldly Princes must be paid, so that God be not defrauded of his more sovereign duty. And therefore Princes have to take heed, how they exact: and other, how they give to Caesar, that is, to their Prince, the things that are due to God, that is, to his Ecclesiastical ministers. Whereupon St. Athanasius receiveth these goodly words out of an epistle of the ancient and famous confessor Hosius Cordubensis to Constantius the Arian Emperor: Cease I beseech thee, and remember that thou art mortal, fear the day of judgment, intermeddle not with Ecclesiastical matters, neither do thou command us in this kind, but rather learn them of us. To thee God hath committed the Empire, to us he hath committed the things that belong to the Church: and as he that with malicious eyes carpeth thine Empire, gainsaith the ordinance of God: so do thou also beware, lest in drawing unto thee Ecclesiastical matters, thou be made guilty of a great crime. Is is written, Give ye the things that are Caesars, to Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God. Therefore neither is it lawful for us in earth to hold the Empire, neither hast thou (O Emperor) power over incense and sacred things. Athan. Ep. ad Solit. vita agentes. And St. Ambrose to Valentinian the emperor (who by the ill counsel of his mother Justina, an Arian, required of St. Ambrose to have one Church in Milan deputed to the Arian Heretics) saith: We pay that which is Caesars, to Caesar: and that which is Gods, to God. Tribute is Caesars, it is not denied: the Church is Gods, it may not verily be yielded to Caesar: because the Temple of God cannot be Caesars right; which no man can deny but it is spoken with the honor of the Emperor. For what is more honorable than that the Emperor be said to be the son of the Church? For a good Emperor is within the Church, not above the Church. Ambr. lib. 5. Epist. Orat. de Basil trad.

17. To God.] These men were very circumspect and wary to do all duties to Caesar, but of their duty to God they had no regard. So Heretics, to flatter temporal Princes, and by them to uphold their heresies, do not only inculcate mens duty to the Prince, dissembling that which is due to God: but also give to the Prince more than due, and take from God his right and duty. But Christ allowing Caesar his right, warneth them also of their duty toward God. And that is it which Catholics inculcate, Obey God, do as he commandeth, Serve him first, and then the Prince.

Cum huius versionis ac aeditionis authores, nobis de fide & eruditione sint probè cogniti, aliique S. Theologiae & linguae Anglicanae peritissimi viri contestati sint, nihil in hoc opere reperiri, quod non sit Catholicae Ecclesiae doctrinae, & pietati consentaneum, vel quod ullo modo potestati ac paci civili repugnet, sed omnia potius veram fidem, Reip. Bonum, virtaeque ac morum probitatem promovere: ex ipsorum fide censemus ista utiliter excudi & publicari posse.

PETRUS REMIGIUS Archidiaconus maior Metropolitanae insignes Ecclesiae Rehemsis, Iuris Canonici Doctor, Archipeiscopatus Rhemensis generalis Vicarius.

HUBERTUS MORUS, Rhemensis Ecclesia Decanus, & Ecclesiastes, & in sacratissimae Theologiae facultae Doctor.

JOANNES LE BESGUE, Canonicus Rhemensis, Doctor Theologus, & Canceliarius Academiae Rhemensis.

GUILELMUS BALBUS, Theologiae professor, Collegis Rhemensis Archimagister.

S. August. Lib. I. C. 3. De serm. Do. in monte.

Paupertate spiritus pervenitur ad Scripturarum cognitionem: ubi oportet hominem semitem praebere, ne pervicacibus concertationibus indocilis reddatur.

We come to the understanding of Scriptures through povertie of spirit: where a man must show himself meek-minded, lest by stubborn contentions, he become incapable and unapt to be taught.

[Severian]

Your misinterpretation is crazy, and contrary to the infallible teaching magisterium of the Church

Pardon me for not taking the Church seriously.

Jesus said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." The logical implication is that nothing is Caesar's because all is God's. Since the Church has seen fit to divvy up the world with Caesar, trusting the Church is as foolish as trusting Caesar.

Please recall that it was a combination of the Church and the State of the day that killed Jesus. Institutional Christians gloss over that salient point.

[Luke-Jr]

Back on topic...

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&pid=1696

"The Wiki Weapon project is not the work of a dispassionate techie seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology. Instead it is a blatant, undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

Bitcoin is the work of "passionate techies seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology", but having radicals as "spokespersons" would be an "undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

[darkmule]

This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

That's a hoot coming from a scamming fruitcake.

[abbyd]

Back on topic...

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&pid=1696

"The Wiki Weapon project is not the work of a dispassionate techie seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology. Instead it is a blatant, undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

Bitcoin is the work of "passionate techies seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology", but having radicals as "spokespersons" would be an "undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

Best laugh I've had all week! Horrible analogy and an even worse article!
This guy is about as dangerous as a grandma running you down with her electric wheelchair...

[darkmule]

Best laugh I've had all week! Horrible analogy and an even worse article!
This guy is about as dangerous as a grandma running you down with her electric wheelchair...

It is an incredibly stupid article.  The flabbergasting hypocrisy of attacking this guy as some kind of menace is ridiculous.  All he is doing is distributing information.

Who is dangerous is the gun manufacturers of the United States selling deadly weapons to anyone and everyone, even enemies of the United States, to both sides of civil wars, to genocidal warlords, etc.  Or the National Rifle Association, which poses as a civil rights group but which is, in actuality, nothing more than an industry lobby. 

Distributed Defense presents no such threat.  They aren't seeking out and stoking wars in other countries to make a profit on them.  What they empower is the individual, by making information available.  The only thing this guy is dangerous to, other than a government regulatory scheme that was already broken before he came along, is corporate profits. 

You can fully expect the gun industry to hate this guy as much as the government.  After all, if the average Joe can provide for the means of his own defense, who needs them?

[abbyd]

Best laugh I've had all week! Horrible analogy and an even worse article!
This guy is about as dangerous as a grandma running you down with her electric wheelchair...

It is an incredibly stupid article.  The flabbergasting hypocrisy of attacking this guy as some kind of menace is ridiculous.  All he is doing is distributing information.

Who is dangerous is the gun manufacturers of the United States selling deadly weapons to anyone and everyone, even enemies of the United States, to both sides of civil wars, to genocidal warlords, etc.  Or the National Rifle Association, which poses as a civil rights group but which is, in actuality, nothing more than an industry lobby. 

Distributed Defense presents no such threat.  They aren't seeking out and stoking wars in other countries to make a profit on them.  What they empower is the individual, by making information available.  The only thing this guy is dangerous to, other than a government regulatory scheme that was already broken before he came along, is corporate profits. 

You can fully expect the gun industry to hate this guy as much as the government.  After all, if the average Joe can provide for the means of his own defense, who needs them?

Are you making "a blatant, undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government"?  Because if you are... /sarc

[caveden]

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

Wow.... and this is the individual picking who gets to be on the "Press Center"... indeed, not even Hugo Chavez would be so explicit.

Please, sirius, just shut this damn Press Center down. It's impossible to have any other consensus with people like this one I'm quoting. It's better to just delete this page from bitcoin.org.

[sirius]

Let's drop the press page and link to a wiki page from the resources page. If the wiki page turns out not so well, we can unlink it. I'm sure they'll find interviewees anyway. We can see how the bitcoin press center site develops.

Press contacts wiki page should have a similar disclaimer text. The listed people should have at least one previous appearance in mainstream media. If edit wars occur, we can come up with more specific criteria.

Can someone with wiki permissions create a page "Press contacts"?

[Luke-Jr]

Can someone with wiki permissions create a page "Press contacts"?

Anyone can create pages on the wiki... just need to go through the antispam stuff.
Someone else is already working on a bitcoinpresscenter.org or such, though, so probably a good idea to see how that works out first?

[aantonop]

bitcoinpresscenter.org is done, from an engine and content management perspective. I'm working on the visual layout and design (a CSS designer is working on it for me).

If you can look beyond the very simple and naked "look" , please visit bitcoinpresscenter.org and propose new press contacts directly. Anyone can propose a new contact and provide all the relevant details (which is a lot more information that the current press center).

Feedback is very welcome so that bitcoinpresscenter.org can be improved and launched...

[Herodes]

The Wiki is crap.  I went there when I first started and it is full of dead links and scam web site links.  Some parts are better than others but I would not recommend to a newbie or reporter.

The press center should probably include independently done bios.  For example, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=197474.0

Are you referring to this wiki ?

You are aware that wiki's are community projects where everyone can contribute ? So in reality, 1 person actively editing it and making a best effort to keep it up to date is worth more than 1000 people complaining it is bad.

[marcus_of_augustus]

bitcoinpresscenter.org is done, from an engine and content management perspective. I'm working on the visual layout and design (a CSS designer is working on it for me).

If you can look beyond the very simple and naked "look" , please visit bitcoinpresscenter.org and propose new press contacts directly. Anyone can propose a new contact and provide all the relevant details (which is a lot more information that the current press center).

Feedback is very welcome so that bitcoinpresscenter.org can be improved and launched...

Hey! ... why aren't Roger Ver and Jon Matonis on bitcoinpresscenter.org ?? ... is this some kind of political censorship or something?  

PS: good work btw.

[darkmule]

The Wiki is crap.  I went there when I first started and it is full of dead links and scam web site links.  Some parts are better than others but I would not recommend to a newbie or reporter.

It's also heavily biased and plagued with edit warring by, among others, Puke-Jr.

For example:  https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Litecoin

Pump and Dump Scheme

According to some, one or more of the aforementioned reasons imply that Litecoin has no future potential, and therefore effectively functions as a "pump and dump" scheme, rewarding those who get in sooner at the expense of those who adopt it just before it finally fails (and are left with nothing).

So after a bold-faced subject heading, the article cites "According to some," classic weasel words completely inappropriate for a reference work, especially for a serious accusation.

Then, after accusing it of being a pump and dump scam, the article goes on:

It's important to note, generally these critics do not think that Litecoin/Blockchain currencies are pump and dump schemes "per se"; but rather that the existing network effect of Bitcoin, combined with the lack of meaningful differentiation between Litecoin and Bitcoin and Litecoin's adoption of a "designed to fail" proof-of-work algorithm; that Litecoin is bound to fail in the end. Bitcoin does not suffer from these "flaws" and therefore does not fall under the "pump and dump" scheme, according to this argument.

So it's not a pump and dump scheme, but we're going to call it that anyway in an article with a bold-faced subject heading "Pump and Dump Scheme."

"These critics," of course, are the authors of the very text where they're citing themselves as sources.  Including Puke-Jr.  Try to change it and they'll go to edit war on you.

[aantonop]

Hey! ... why aren't Roger Ver and Jon Matonis on bitcoinpresscenter.org ?? ... is this some kind of political censorship or something?  

PS: good work btw.

Signup, create a user and add whoever you want.

I won't nominate anyone yet...

[aantonop]

Bitcoinpresscenter.org, the new design is ready and will go live in the next 24hrs. I would love to hear feedback. It looks like this: