I would like to propose creating a bitcoin user's group, which will be incorpoated in the US as a non-profit foundation, with a board and members.

The bitcoin user group will promote the common interest (bitcoin) as expressed by the members resolutions, discussions and votes.

To that end I propose the Open Bitcoin User Group be formed as follows:

- A nominal membership fee of 0.01 BTC or $1 USD, whichever is less. It should be open to a very broad user group.
Fees, donations and expenditures are managed openly and audited once yearly by independent audit.

- An elected board of directors who are responsible ONLY for fiduciary control, and do not represent the will of the community. Membership funds are used for maintenance and operations only. Donated funds are controlled by member votes.
- A direct representation system that allows any member to propose resolutions, in a way that all members can see them
- Upon achieving a certain percentage of membership approval (1% or 0.1%, something feasible), the proposal is put to a member-wide vote.
- All vote results are recorded publicly. They will represent the "will of the open bitcoin user group".
- No one gets veto, no one is excluded
- One member, one vote. No one is asked "what did you do for bitcoin lately".
- Board members DO NOT GET TO VOTE on member proposals. If you have de-facto power, you don't get to vote.

No bosses, no petty tyrants. Representative boards are a relic of scarce-communications. Direct democracy is both feasible and efficient, on a mass scale.

Please do not bash. This is not a move "against" any person or organization. There is clearly a deficiency in the current systems of representation and communication for the community.

Offer help, ideas, support, etc. All are welcome.

Exactly what sort of 'power' would such a group have?
It speaks for bitcoin? Bitcoin is a thing, I don't think it has opinions that need to be spoken.

Direct democracy still equals 3 wolves and a sheep deciding whats for diner.

How many votes can I buy for 100 BTC? (either bribes or multiple accounts, take your pick)

Well 1 vote per person - how do you enforce that?
What keeps me from creating sock puppets?
Why would I donate to something with no clue how my money might get used?

This sounds like a good idea even if bitcoin.org weren't having transparency issues.

It could be said that this is a 'fork' of one of the management groups.

Diversity is important and hopefully, ultimately, a plurality of organisations will serve the community better than one.

Interesting. As soon as you have money and voting, you have laws which apply. For instance you are referring to US law, and I don't believe in US law to say the least. (I think the US is becoming a lawless country in many ways). Why should BTC be US-based? Laws without enforcement / courts don't have much meaning. If there is something wrong with BTC, another currency / protocol will emerge. For instance Ripple is created by an organization and we will see how that works out.

Please suggest alternative venues for incorporation.

Perhaps a country that is both neutral and has stronger non-profit and privacy laws?

Somewhere in Scandinavia? New Zealand? Australia?

I'm open to all suggestions - Please don't tell me what is wrong, I'm sure I got a lot wrong on my first draft!

 Tell me how to do it RIGHT in your opinion.

There's no reason for me to set the rules. That goes against the whole point of this.

Help me crowdsource the rules for a broad-based representative association that can promote the common interest (bitcoin) via the expression of the members through resolutions, discussions and voting.

Thank you!

I just checked and you are right. I miscalculated.

How is $1 per year (0.01 BTC)?

Reasonable?

Let's say $1 per member per year.  No lifetime membership - have to pay each year to keep current. Oh, obviously there are no corporate memberships. People only.

I have a strong reluctance to donate to organizations to "represent me". It's too open-ended. I'd much rather donate to specific goals, and what's missing right now is someone to organize and coordinate crowdfunding efforts.

I think you need some structure in place in order to achieve the secondary goals you're talking about. Already you recognise that you need an organisation to coordinate crowd-funding efforts. This could be a duty of the Bitcoin organisation.

Just familiar with 501(c)(3) non-profit laws in the US.

I'd love to hear alternatives, especially if they offer better protections for non-profits, better privacy laws etc.

Perhaps New Zealand? Australia? Sweden? Germany?