Daily Adoption Action Plan (Updated daily)

[QuestionAuthority]

So you don't believe the stats that say Bitcoin has increased in hits for 2013 vs every other year of its existence?

Of course it's obvious that it increased. Where did you get that conclusion from?

Oh, ok. That's all I was really saying, that something is happening and I hope it continues.

[wolverine.ks]

Im not clear on why encouraging people to spend their bitcoin is a good idea.

wouldnt that mean you are encouraging them to use something that has x perceived value(btc), to purchase something with y perceived value(some product or service), instead of using something that has z perceived value(fiat), to purchase something with y perceived value(some product or service)?

if x is less than z, you would not need to encourage them to trade it for something of greater value. if x is greater than z, you are asking them to sacrifice value.

you are then asking them to sacrifice their own wealth in order to benefit others. i consider that to be charity, and generally not in the interest of the person spending their btc.

you could, however, argue that the sacrificed value is an investment in the btc economy, which will then pay dividends in the future.

however, you would then have to compare this scenario to the the alternatives, namely, 'what investment in the btc economy could you have made if you had used fiat to begin with?' and 'are there any other investments that would pay more dividends and/or pay dividends sooner?'

the logic used to justify the claims made in this post, seem to be identical to the logic used to justify the existence of the Federal Reserve, government spending, and inflation in general, i.e. 'Increase the velocity of money and increase the health of the economy.'

in my opinion, instead of encouraging people to spend their btc to improve the health of the btc economy, it would be more efficient and effective at improving the health of the btc economy if you were to encourage people to part with their btc (by trading it for products or services) because they perceived it to be an increase in personal wealth.

although, thats just my opinion, i could be wrong.

[pwi]

Im not clear on why encouraging people to spend their bitcoin is a good idea.

wouldnt that mean you are encouraging them to use something that has x perceived value(btc), to purchase something with y perceived value(some product or service), instead of using something that has z perceived value(fiat), to purchase something with y perceived value(some product or service)?

if x is less than z, you would not need to encourage them to trade it for something of greater value. if x is greater than z, you are asking them to sacrifice value.

you are then asking them to sacrifice their own wealth in order to benefit others. i consider that to be charity, and generally not in the interest of the person spending their btc.

you could, however, argue that the sacrificed value is an investment in the btc economy, which will then pay dividends in the future.

however, you would then have to compare this scenario to the the alternatives, namely, 'what investment in the btc economy could you have made if you had used fiat to begin with?' and 'are there any other investments that would pay more dividends and/or pay dividends sooner?'

the logic used to justify the claims made in this post, seem to be identical to the logic used to justify the existence of the Federal Reserve, government spending, and inflation in general, i.e. 'Increase the velocity of money and increase the health of the economy.'

in my opinion, instead of encouraging people to spend their btc to improve the health of the btc economy, it would be more efficient and effective at improving the health of the btc economy if you were to encourage people to part with their btc (by trading it for products or services) because they perceived it to be an increase in personal wealth.

although, thats just my opinion, i could be wrong.

I think I get what you are saying. However, spending money of any variety, grows the economy using that money. Saving money in an appreciative manner is good for one's personal economy. Both have positive consequences. We have plenty of btc hoarding and not enough spending at the moment. Bitcoin has a finite reserve, so comparing it to say the Fed is impossible to do. Greater adoption = greater value. No one talked about charitable giving of btc that I can see.

I don't advocate blowing one's bitcoin load. Example: Product 'a' has value 'x' and can purchased with either btc or fiat (btc:fiat :: 1:1 value at time = 0). Consumer John plans on buying product 'a' for said value 'x'. Consumer John imagines that buying the product with btc will increase the rate of btc adoption and thus potentially increases the value of John's remaining btc hoard. John then uses fiat to buy btc equal to the value of product 'a', and subsequently purchases product 'a' with btc obtained with fiat.

When merchants can see that consumers are not just willing to spend bitcoins, but insist on spending them; they will line up looking for solutions that facilitate the transactions. This is a good thing.   

[wolverine.ks]

everyone is already willing to spend their bitcoins
the real question is 'for what?'

the reason they dont spend is not to be annoying, the reason they dont spend is not to destroy bitcoin....
the reason they dont spend is because they believe there is nothing worth spending it on.

you want to encourage people to spend? offer a product or service that is worth more to people than their bitcoin.

if people continually spend their bitcoin on things that are worth less than the bitcoin, you will be destroying wealth, not creating it and eventually bitcoin will be worthless. imagine if bitcoin was used to pay people to dig ditches and then pay them again to fill them in. did you create wealth or destroy it? by exchanging bitcoin for things of less value, you are telling everyone that bitcoin has a lower value, by demanding a better product or service in exchange for bitcoin, you are showing everyone just how powerful bitcoins really are.

is the whole point of encouraging people to spend their bitcoin to indirectly increase the demand for transaction services?

by charity i meant 'using one's resources to benefit another, while at the same time, not expecting a return of equal or greater value.' if you spend your bitcoin instead of fiat, and as a result lose personal wealth, and you dont expect to recoup that lost personal wealth, you have committed an act of charity. not to be confused with an act of ignorance, where you do expect to recoup the personal wealth but fail to do so. im not sure that is any clearer, lol ,lets hope so.

[hahahafr]

What the fuck is wrong with BTC?

The ISO 4217 currency codes are an international standard way to refer to currencies. They consist of three letters, written all caps. For currencies issued by nations, the first two letters are a code for the country, and the third letter represents the currency issued. Example national currencies are the USD (United States, Dollar), GBP (Great Britain, Pound), or JPY (Japan, Yen). Non-national currencies are designated by an X (no nation) followed by a two letter code. This can be precious metals, such as XAG (Silver), XAU (Gold), or XPT (Platinum). It can also be international currencies, such as XAF (African Francs), or XCD (East Caribbean Dollars).

Many people have been using the code BTC for bitcoins, which is clearly wrong. There exists a currency BTN (Bhutan, Ngultrum); BT is the country code for Bhutan. BTC, by the code rules, stands for Bhutan Colones, or Bhutan Crunchies, or Bhutan Calafragilistics. BTC is not Bitcoins.

The rules are pretty clear. Bitcoins are not issued by a nation state, so the code should start with X. BitCoins is comprised of two words, so we can abbreviate that BC. So we should use, and ask for international recognition of, XBC. XBC = (Non-national currency) BitCoins.

This code is for use anywhere the official international codes are used. Exchanges should adopt this code immediately, and stop using BTC. For example, "The current exchange rate is 14.15 USD/XBC." Or "Please send payment of 456.78978466 XBC to the following address."

That being said, in an informal setting you can still use the abbreviation "btc" or "Btc" (lower case, to avoid confusion). I realize this is an uphill battle for implementation since the incorrect use of BTC is spread through the entire bitcoin community, but we need to change this NOW while the community is still small rather than later.

If bitcoins do well, in the future we may have very small prices for items and people will want to use millibitcoins or microbitcoins for convenience. (Reminder: 1 satoshi is 0.01 microbitcoin.) I propose using the terms mBC for millibitcoins and µBC for microbitcoins (use uBC if you can't type µ (mu)).

IN SUMMARY: Everybody, please stop using the abbreviation BTC and pretending it is a good international abbreviation, and start using XBC to refer to bitcoins.

EDIT: As was pointed out later in the thread, XBC is already claimed, so I am supporting XBT instead.
 DO NOT POST SESC LINKS

Europe is not a country, nor is the Euro-zone, yet we have EUR and not XER or XEU.

I don't support XBT. BTC is full of sense.

[Terk]

if people continually spend their bitcoin on things that are worth less than the bitcoin, you will be destroying wealth, not creating it and eventually bitcoin will be worthless. imagine if bitcoin was used to pay people to dig ditches and then pay them again to fill them in. did you create wealth or destroy it? by exchanging bitcoin for things of less value, you are telling everyone that bitcoin has a lower value, by demanding a better product or service in exchange for bitcoin, you are showing everyone just how powerful bitcoins really are.

This has no sense. The whole idea of encouraging people to spend bitcoins is “if you happen to spend your money on something, please consider paying with bitcoins if it's possible” not “throw your bitcoins away by paying some people to dig ditches and then paying some other people to fill them in, f'yeah”.

[Ares]

Updated for 5/25/13 with a great opportunity.

[farfiman]

Adoption Action Plan you say? What Bitcoin needs is real world propaganda. Online world is fucked up, don't count on it much because almost everyone browse something others
are not browsing. You can put "Bitcoin Accepted Here" on million of websites but there are still trillions of other websites. It is lost battle, forget it.

Revolution starts locally, in offline world, and for that you can't go much better than using real world items made to promote Bitcoin.

http://www.cafepress.com/bitcoinmegastore
http://www.cafepress.com/bitcoinmegastore/9928661

Online world is a bit "fucked up" as you say and most of the sites that accept bitcoin are mega geeky sites. But acceptance by more and more online businesses  builds up part of the critical mass bitcoin needs. Just wait for one of the  amazon/ebay type/size sites and then the rest will follow.

"Real world" businesses is a much tougher cookie. Seeing people with shirts and stickers is great  but wont be enough. Even having customers walk in and ask about paying in bitcoin is a small victory.

A business owner that sees bitcoin accepted on ebay or amazon will convince him/her of the validity of the system more than anything else.

[farfiman]

"Real world" businesses is a much tougher cookie. Seeing people with shirts and stickers is great but wont be enough. Even having customers walk in and ask about paying in bitcoin is a small victory.

In my hometown (around 50k people) I'm the only person actively involved in Bitcoin. I have few real world Bitcoin items bought from my own store with profits made there. Number
of people that asked me what that strange B on my T-shirts is supposed to mean and got more or less interested in Bitcoin afterwards is enormously bigger than number of people who
actualy knew what that strange B on my T-shirts means. "Enormously bigger" as in "1000+ people / no one" ratio.

Thats great but you want them not to "be connected" to Facebook, twitter, google+ etc"  ( taken from your suggestions  in a different thread..)    how is that going to work?.


sorry OP for messing up your thread- delete at will....

[farfiman]

"Real world" businesses is a much tougher cookie. Seeing people with shirts and stickers is great but wont be enough. Even having customers walk in and ask about paying in bitcoin is a small victory.

In my hometown (around 50k people) I'm the only person actively involved in Bitcoin. I have few real world Bitcoin items bought from my own store with profits made there. Number
of people that asked me what that strange B on my T-shirts is supposed to mean and got more or less interested in Bitcoin afterwards is enormously bigger than number of people who
actualy knew what that strange B on my T-shirts means. "Enormously bigger" as in "1000+ people / no one" ratio.

Thats great but you want them not to "be connected" to Facebook, twitter, google+ etc"  ( taken from your suggestions  in a different thread..) how is that going to work?.

You mean Bitcoin depends on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, etc.? Since when? Or you mean Bitcoin should make itself dependant on those bullshits and other 3rd-party "services"?

No  , you got me wrong. I HATE.. no... REALLY HATE  all those things . Bitcoin isn't dependent on all that junk  to work but if you want real people to use bitcoin in real businesses then you have no choice but to use those tools as well because that's what is used today by the crowd. 

[farfiman]

There is always a choice. Moreover, "crowd" you are refering to is maybe few % of world population and are provably the most stupid part of population. As such, they do not really
matter, even though it might seem they do. They are nothing but useful idiots manipulated by the system on almost every level.

If you want bitcoin to develop as a geeky (online...) ,shadow , anarchistic type of thing.. then fine.. your way is great.
That small % you are talking about ( and it's not small)  is the exact people we need .

I think it has to go mainstream 1st ( with all those things we don't like)   After that we can get rid of them and have bitcoin stay


So not to make more work for the OP ( if he decides to clean this thread up) I'll leave it at that. If you want to continue this ( and maybe with more participants  start a new thread somewhere relevant.....

[farfiman]

There is always a choice. Moreover, "crowd" you are refering to is maybe few % of world population and are provably the most stupid part of population. As such, they do not really
matter, even though it might seem they do. They are nothing but useful idiots manipulated by the system on almost every level.

If you want bitcoin to develop as a geeky (online...) ,shadow , anarchistic type of thing.. then fine.. your way is great.
That small % you are talking about ( and it's not small)  is the exact people we need .

If you want Bitcoin ruined used than yes, you need those people.

couldn't resist....

[Ares]

Updated for 5/27/13

Note: there are entire forums here for arguments, lets try to keep this thread clean and efficient please.

As always, please look for ideas for the next action plan.

[Ares]

Updated