A bitcoin user group that is open and expresses the will of the community

[charleshoskinson]

Temp Logo Suggestion:



I just made this as a filler until we have something official to call the org. Any quick changes?

More suggestions:

[willphase]

This is an admirable effort, but the Bitcoin community is so diverse, there's people who believe that taxation is theft, there's people who believe that the best way for bitcoin to succeed is to get government regulation, there's people who understand the codebase and how bitcoin works intimately and then there's people who lose bitcoins because they don't understand Change addresses.  Any proposal by the user group will end up with all these groups disagreeing with each other, and you'll end up with disenfranchised members and eventual RAGE QUIT.

There is a reason why most western democracies have grown to have elected representatives, simply giving power completely to each individual (even now, when we have the technology to support this) doesn't really work - there needs to be some structure to the decision making.  You might disagree with some of the approaches that the bitcoin foundation are taking, but really the best way (as with any form of government/representation) is to join the debate and try and change the views through reasoned arguments.

I wish you all the best for the user group, but I do fear that it will just become a very high maintenance (counting votes, managing membership) version of existing bitcointalk argument threads.

Will

[charleshoskinson]

This is an admirable effort, but the Bitcoin community is so diverse, there's people who believe that taxation is theft, there's people who believe that the best way for bitcoin to succeed is to get government regulation, there's people who understand the codebase and how bitcoin works intimately and then there's people who lose bitcoins because they don't understand Change addresses.  Any proposal by the user group will end up with all these groups disagreeing with each other, and you'll end up with disenfranchised members and eventual RAGE QUIT.

There is a reason why most western democracies have grown to have elected representatives, simply giving power completely to each individual (even now, when we have the technology to support this) doesn't really work - there needs to be some structure to the decision making.  You might disagree with some of the approaches that the bitcoin foundation are taking, but really the best way (as with any form of government/representation) is to join the debate and try and change the views through reasoned arguments.

I wish you all the best for the user group, but I do fear that it will just become a very high maintenance (counting votes, managing membership) version of existing bitcointalk argument threads.

Will

Thank you will for your words of wisdom. I believe that with the amazing technology we have seen built over the last decade it is more possible now to build an organization as this one than ever before. Perhaps it will fail. Perhaps it will succeed, but remember the primary goal- to give everyone a voice. Exclusion and centralization are the two evils bitcoin seeks to slay.

We'd love some feedback on what you would suggest to do to avoid destructive debates.

[aantonop]

I wish you all the best for the user group, but I do fear that it will just become a very high maintenance (counting votes, managing membership) version of existing bitcointalk argument threads.

Will

I think it might be necessary to set a higher threshold for proposals to come to vote, to counteract fringe trolling. But at least this group will have a clear and transparent process. Rage quitting is what happens when you have no voice or way to be heard (or at least then it is justified). More voice, better process, clear and transparent rules make for less impotent rage.

Bitcointalk is great - but fills a different need. It is the town square. I want a ballot-proposition mechanism and local user chapters. I think nothing like that exists and there is both room for and need for it.

Don't tell me how it will fail (or do, I'll ignore it), tell me how to make it succeed. What needs to be done differently to overcome the issue you highlight?

[charleshoskinson]

You might also want to consider talking to the meetup groups. They are the closest thing we have to local chapters.

What needs to be done differently to overcome the issue you highlight?

First, every vote needs to be directly tied to exactly one person. I like the hash system I proposed, but we could implement something different. Second, we need to find a way to keep debates both focused and highly specific. This is very difficult on the internet in my experience. Perhaps there could be a reward system for reaching consensus or some form of gamification?

[willphase]

Don't tell me how it will fail (or do, I'll ignore it), tell me how to make it succeed. What needs to be done differently to overcome the issue you highlight?

I think a common approach to this problem is to have a method by which proposals can be put forward, support can be measured for the proposals, a threshold above which proposals are put to a public ballot, and then a threshold of participation/voting needed to pass a motion.  Then with the backing of this many people and the records of the debate, an way forward can be agreed (e.g. someone do coding, someone approach the press, someone make a new website)

The way that bitcoin has developed over the past few years has been very much based around - if you have an idea then code up a git pull request, show that it provides benefit and then it will eventually get adopted into the code.  This works if the people coming up with the ideas also have the ability to code them.  Of course, I presume the purpose of the user group would be to do more than just git pull requests to the bitcoin source - are you talking about also advocacy for legal standing/regulation.

Do you have an example of where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

[aantonop]

I think a common approach to this problem is to have a method by which proposals can be put forward, support can be measured for the proposals, a threshold above which proposals are put to a public ballot, and then a threshold of participation/voting needed to pass a motion.  Then with the backing of this many people and the records of the debate, an way forward can be agreed (e.g. someone do coding, someone approach the press, someone make a new website)

Yes, that's what the initial rules propose. I had a 1% of membership approval threshold for putting a resolution to vote, but the number is just a placeholder. In fact, I can see a better way would be a dynamic system where the "difficulty" of passing a resolution adjusts to keep the number of votes at a manageable level. Kinda like the hashing difficulty.

The way that bitcoin has developed over the past few years has been very much based around - if you have an idea then code up a git pull request, show that it provides benefit and then it will eventually get adopted into the code.  This works if the people coming up with the ideas also have the ability to code them.  Of course, I presume the purpose of the user group would be to do more than just git pull requests to the bitcoin source

Actually, code is the one thing this community will NOT have authority over. That's the only area the core developers DO have authority. This community would have less authority, less expertise and no need to be involved in core code. Leave that to the devs.

This is more about advocacy, education, world-press relations, local chapters, newbie support, local business support etc.

Do you have an example of where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Do you have examples of where the community was consulted on an issue in anything more than a "let's pretend we haven't made the decision already" manner?

I see a lot of ad-hoc projects that are very interesting and useful. Then I see a few organized and centralized entities which have a lot of power and no accountability. I see nothing in between

[willphase]

Do you have examples of where the community was consulted on an issue in anything more than a "let's pretend we haven't made the decision already" manner?

I asked first

I think you'll find that there is a *lot* of discussion on the bitcoin irc channel(s), on the git pull request(s), and a bit on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, all of which are open and anyone can participate in.  Once again - I'd be interested if you could point out a situation where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

[Eich]

wait, isnt this what bitcointalk.org is for?

[bg002h]

How about asking theymos for a subforum? 

I'm all for us pooling our ideas and resources.

[FreddyFender]

Do you have examples of where the community was consulted on an issue in anything more than a "let's pretend we haven't made the decision already" manner?

I asked first

I think you'll find that there is a *lot* of discussion on the bitcoin irc channel(s), on the git pull request(s), and a bit on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, all of which are open and anyone can participate in.  Once again - I'd be interested if you could point out a situation where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

So, is this a conversation or just goading? I fail to see where holding your breath for a reply, or nee-ner, nee-ner is bringing the community closer to discussion of a User Group?

Andreas, you have my attention and I'll help out anyway I can.
Local exposure here in the Maritimes, nationally here in Canada, quizzing, educating, meetings, whatever.

WillPhase, you have a great forum here to supply all knowledge concerning hardware/mining/pools and such.
Any devs needing help for anything other than altcoin, good luck with that.
I want User Groups, and I want it soon. Not a troll-pile sent by other devs to derp,derp the hell out of threads that have nothing to do with them or their projects.
Find a thread on bitcointalk.org that has not been overrun with FUD, only exists on the hardware/mining/pools section. Because you would not put up with that if someone went all out, misdirection lying herp derp on your frequent hangouts. You cleaned out your deadwood, we do not have that option because the nature of education and development.

[Inedible]

Don't tell me how it will fail (or do, I'll ignore it), tell me how to make it succeed. What needs to be done differently to overcome the issue you highlight?

I suspect you're going to need to show a bit more leadership at least initially.

Whilst canvassing ideas and suggestions is a great start, there'll need to come a time for solid action in a direction that might not appease all camps.

You'll unlikely be able to build a working organisation on consensus alone.

[willphase]

So, is this a conversation or just goading? I fail to see where holding your breath for a reply, or nee-ner, nee-ner is bringing the community closer to discussion of a User Group?

I'm actually genuinely trying to understand the reasons behind this and why it's needed on top of the existing methods of communication.

WillPhase, you have a great forum here to supply all knowledge concerning hardware/mining/pools and such.
Any devs needing help for anything other than altcoin, good luck with that.
I want User Groups, and I want it soon. Not a troll-pile sent by other devs to derp,derp the hell out of threads that have nothing to do with them or their projects.
Find a thread on bitcointalk.org that has not been overrun with FUD, only exists on the hardware/mining/pools section. Because you would not put up with that if someone went all out, misdirection lying herp derp on your frequent hangouts. You cleaned out your deadwood, we do not have that option because the nature of education and development.

I'm not sure this would be any different in a user group - the same people who participate in bitcointalk will participate in this user group - there was a reason why the devs (almost completely) left bitcointalk for irc and git and mailing lists - and there was a reason why they moved the forums from *.bitcoin.org domain name...

I wish this group the best of luck, I agree with several of the other people here that probably the best approach is to come up with some ground rules (e.g. the number of votes to set forth a motion, voting procedures, things like that) then set up some kind of forum (could be based on bitcointalk.org - I'm sure theymos would set up a subgroup if you ask nicely).  I don't think trying to come to a consensus on how a consensus should be arrived at will work

Regarding helping people - I actually find it far more rewarding to help people posting in /r/bitcoin than here - since people actually seem grateful of information rather than trying to turn every single thread into a flamewar/argument.

Will

[FreddyFender]

..., I agree with several of the other people here that probably the best approach is to come up with some ground rules (e.g. the number of votes to set forth a motion, voting procedures, things like that) then set up some kind of forum (could be based on bitcointalk.org - I'm sure theymos would set up a subgroup if you ask nicely).  I don't think trying to come to a consensus on how a consensus should be arrived at will work

Regarding helping people - I actually find it far more rewarding to help people posting in /r/bitcoin than here - since people actually seem grateful of information rather than trying to turn every single thread into a flamewar/argument.

Will

I agree with you about! Do you remember the first alt coins and BTCExpress/LukeJr.? I left, couldn't stand it. I would ask a question on certain IRC channels and get pissy/no replies because everybody had stakes in the game. Turf wars over nothing. MikeH&MikeG/Gavin/Hal were not always available to bounce ideas off of. TVM and PAL technologies are tough curves for a Flash programmer. oof!
The amount of trolling is getting exponential.
We need a place for educating newbs/alt-devs/afficianados of every ilk so the pressure is removed off the forums. I watched Matthew N Wright chase a new forum member around for 4-5 days calling him Atlas,?!? ... really? Ignore buttons don't change the fact of ignorant.
How do you keep the hardware/mining/pools forum so clean? I know humor and tough skin help but newbies can't tell who is serious and who is not. I would not invite my enemies to these forums because of the way any/all topics get smeared with equal/magnanimous shit. I just want a forum/user group where "here is where you get x information" not buffalo crap and bananas.

*edit forgot an h!

[franky1]

..., I agree with several of the other people here that probably the best approach is to come up with some ground rules (e.g. the number of votes to set forth a motion, voting procedures, things like that) then set up some kind of forum (could be based on bitcointalk.org - I'm sure theymos would set up a subgroup if you ask nicely).  I don't think trying to come to a consensus on how a consensus should be arrived at will work

Regarding helping people - I actually find it far more rewarding to help people posting in /r/bitcoin than here - since people actually seem grateful of information rather than trying to turn every single thread into a flamewar/argument.

Will

I agree with you about! Do you remember the first alt coins and BTCExpress/LukeJr.? I left, couldn't stand it. I would ask a question on certain IRC channels and get pissy/no replies because everybody had stakes in the game. Turf wars over nothing. MikeH&MikeG/Gavin/Hal were not always available to bounce ideas off of. TVM and PAL technologies are tough curves for a Flash programmer. oof!
The amount of trolling is getting exponential.
We need a place for educating newbs/alt-devs/afficianados of every ilk so the pressure is removed off the forums. I watched Matthew N Wright chase a new forum member around for 4-5 days calling him Atlas,?!? ... really? Ignore buttons don't change the fact of ignorant.
How do you keep the hardware/mining/pools forum so clean? I know humor and tough skin help but newbies can't tell who is serious and who is not. I would not invite my enemies to these forums because of the way any/all topics get smeared with equal/magnanimous shit. I just want a forum/user group where "here is where you get x information" not buffalo crap and bananas.

*edit forgot an h!

any place where multiple voices come together and try having an opinion will always have others that object. so instead of having closed communities, or voting systems that have a tiered approach of 1, is the topic even worthy of voting for 2. then voting for it. i find it alot better to just provide all the advice and assistance there is without limits and allow individuals/groups to then grab whats important to them, what bit would help them out most and then they use it within their region/ group or project.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list of businesses that accept bitcoin. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list anyone thats not afraid of getting on camera that wants to be a media contact. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

easiest way to do it is to have a subforum here called the 'community suggestions' where the replies will be the solutions to the topic requests

[aantonop]

After a break-through on the press center issue, I will be distracted for a few days because I am FORKING the press center.

bitcoinpresscenter.org will be the inclusive press center that does not live on bitcoin.org. More info to follow, site up by Monday

[cypherdoc]

After a break-through on the press center issue, I will be distracted for a few days because I am FORKING the press center.

bitcoinpresscenter.org will be the inclusive press center that does not live on bitcoin.org. More info to follow, site up by Monday

explanation?

[charleshoskinson]

I watched Matthew N Wright chase a new forum member around for 4-5 days calling him Atlas,?!? ... really? Ignore buttons don't change the fact of ignorant.

If Matt wants to call me a tool for donating my time and money to help people learn about bitcoin for free, then that's his prerogative. I just dislike his publication will not help us broadcast to the bitcoin community our project and its goals.

explanation?
 

Simple, he is a leader and a CEO with resources. When someone who is proactive sees something unjust, he does something about it. We'll have a better more beautiful and inclusive press center in a few days.

[aantonop]

the primary issue of the existing press center on bitcoin.org was that because it was embedded in a site with other content and multiple conflicts of interest, there was a perceived need to control access and preserve some sense of "moderation". That was misguided and ended up causing a crisis of leadership, an uproar from the community and a running battle on github pull requests.

After a long and protracted argument, which admittedly got heated on all sides (I am not too proud about some of the things I said or the way I said them), it appears that the press center will be removed from bitcoin.org. It was too political to b housed in such a prominent community site.

What I am offering is to do the work (in the next week) to produce a site that has no other purpose than to be a neutral and inclusive press center, geared towards functionality and offering a powerful tool for the world press. My experience in press relations has guided me to add many features currently missing from the press center, simple things that journalists need. For example:

- Filters for language spoken
- Multiple resolution pictures and a press-kit for each representative
- A standard attribution blurb, short and long bio
etc.

I will be putting together the platform and then inviting people to fill it as inclusively as possible with press contacts. The process for nomination is TBD, but it will err towards inclusion and will not have any veto wielding powers.

This solves the main problem that led to the call for a user group. Though that negates the need to do the user group right now, I still plan on doing it at a slower and less urgent pace. In the mean time, I am liberating the press center and giving the control to the community at large.

Another thing happened today: Sirius who is the actual owner of the domain dropped in after the week long debate and said he thought the concerns were valid and the press center should not live in bitcoin.org. That probably settles the issue. In a power game, the big kahuna just spoke.

More to come soon.

[Inedible]

the primary issue of the existing press center on bitcoin.org was that because it was embedded in a site with other content and multiple conflicts of interest, there was a perceived need to control access and preserve some sense of "moderation". That was misguided and ended up causing a crisis of leadership, an uproar from the community and a running battle on github pull requests.

After a long and protracted argument, which admittedly got heated on all sides (I am not too proud about some of the things I said or the way I said them), it appears that the press center will be removed from bitcoin.org. It was too political to b housed in such a prominent community site.

What I am offering is to do the work (in the next week) to produce a site that has no other purpose than to be a neutral and inclusive press center, geared towards functionality and offering a powerful tool for the world press. My experience in press relations has guided me to add many features currently missing from the press center, simple things that journalists need. For example:

- Filters for language spoken
- Multiple resolution pictures and a press-kit for each representative
- A standard attribution blurb, short and long bio
etc.

I will be putting together the platform and then inviting people to fill it as inclusively as possible with press contacts. The process for nomination is TBD, but it will err towards inclusion and will not have any veto wielding powers.

This solves the main problem that led to the call for a user group. Though that negates the need to do the user group right now, I still plan on doing it at a slower and less urgent pace. In the mean time, I am liberating the press center and giving the control to the community at large.

Another thing happened today: Sirius who is the actual owner of the domain dropped in after the week long debate and said he thought the concerns were valid and the press center should not live in bitcoin.org. That probably settles the issue. In a power game, the big kahuna just spoke.

More to come soon.

Making great progress aantonop