The truth about the BFL 1000 BTC fund?

[charleshoskinson]

I've also come to this conclusion. They of course will use someone like Maged to say "well it's just because you don't have an eatablished rep" or something, but without a public guideline, it's funny how anyone but an insider would even know what their reasons or rules are for acceptance (they have yet to respond to my inquiries as to the official process and who is in charge of donation decisions). Judging by the response, it's only one person, the one who lost the bet in the first place. Conflicts of interest abound.

Well the FSF and EFF are on that list thus if they pay I will congratulate them on the donation; however, BFL somehow always manages to make a potentially good thing corrupted. Why represent this donation as an independent foundation funding worthy projects if it is simply a corporate donation for brand repair? It's dishonest.

Thank you for letting me know about this Matt. I'll stop wasting my time with Bitcoin DF and get back to work making lectures.

I've decided to also post one of the emails I sent to the Fund:

Bitcoin DF,

I would like to apply for funds for the Bitcoin Education Project. Funds will be used to develop three courses as described in my interview with Adam Levine on Let's Talk Bitcoin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBrQ07aPsL0

Our goal is to bring one million active new users into the Bitcoin ecosystem by 2014. Our project is highly collaborative (just look at our list of fellows: http://btcedproject.org/?page_id=67). And also has a strategy for Chinese integration with our director of BEP China Li Xiaolai, head of the venture capital firm bitfund.pe.

In just under six weeks we have already acquired over 2,000 students for our flagship course:

https://www.udemy.com/bitcoin-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-crypto/

And we have partnerships with many businesses and media organizations in the Bitcoin community. For example Bitcoin Magazine:

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/bitcoin-magazine-proud-to-be-a-partner-of-the-bitcoin-education-project/

We need to raise 100 bitcoins in 30 days to start our bounty campaign to ensure our content both gets translated into Spanish, Italian and Chinese and we have the opportunity to reward community feedback refining our lectures.

Any contribution- even 0.1 bitcoins- really helps our efforts.

Best Regards,
Charles Hoskinson
Director of BEP
(number erased)
charles.hoskinson@gmail.com

Feel free to contact me at any time

[1714931528]

1714931528

[1714931528]

1714931528

[charleshoskinson]

You haters are fucking ridiculous.  https://www.smore.com/u1tq

Calling a company scammers over 50 times and then you wonder why they will not give you money and use that as a basis for claiming they are scammers?  You really only weaken your own case by claiming such ridiculous shit.  When I read shit that is clearly retarded, it makes me think the exact opposite of what your saying is true.  So if the BFL thing were somehow still a scam, you have just convinced me its legit due to how stupid what you're saying sounds..

Just throwing that out there.

Again, the donations are not under dispute. It is the representation of the donations on behalf of an independent entity with an application process. Josh's statement clearly indicates that the money was given for brand enhancement. This is fine; however, it begs the question why BFL has gone to the trouble to create a webpage? Apparently, if you are a critic of their horrific business practices, then you are automatically disqualified from any consideration.

It's fundamentally dishonest and backhanded. If BFL had simply put the donation page on their website as an initiative of their business, then I wouldn't have wasted any of BEP's resources because of my relationship with the company. Yet they have represented the donation campaign as an neutral foundation seeking requests from the community as a whole.

[Maged]

You haters are fucking ridiculous.  https://www.smore.com/u1tq

Calling a company scammers over 50 times and then you wonder why they will not give you money and use that as a basis for claiming they are scammers?  You really only weaken your own case by claiming such ridiculous shit.  When I read shit that is clearly retarded, it makes me think the exact opposite of what your saying is true.  So if the BFL thing were somehow still a scam, you have just convinced me its legit due to how stupid what you're saying sounds..

Just throwing that out there.

Again, the donations are not under dispute. It is the representation of the donations on behalf of an independent entity with an application process. Josh's statement clearly indicates that the money was given for brand enhancement. This is fine; however, it begs the question why BFL has gone to the trouble to create a webpage? Apparently, if you are a critic of their horrific business practices, then you are automatically disqualified from any consideration.

It's fundamentally dishonest and backhanded. But should we at this point expect anything less from them?

Honestly, as long as the money goes to causes that aren't affiliated with them (as in, they aren't just giving money to themselves), I really don't see a problem.

I'll certainly be looking into this more, but I am really feeling like you guys are purposely leaving out a bunch of information in order to further your own agenda.

[charleshoskinson]

I'll certainly be looking into this more, but I am really feeling like you guys are purposely leaving out a bunch of information in order to further your own agenda.

I haven't left anything out. I saw an article that BFL had made good on a promise to donate 1000 bitcoins and noticed they created a foundation to do so. I assumed the foundation was a neutral entity and sent an email. I never got a reply thus I sent the one I posted above and asked our two fundraisers also to apply. I never received a reply. I never assumed any malice or dishonesty until I stumbled upon Matt's post.

Matt nor anyone in the general community was told about our solicitation of the fund for a donation therefore I have no reason to believe he fabricated Josh's response. It greatly disheartens me BFL has yet again taken something good and found a way to corrupt it somehow. This donation was for brand enhancement alone and had nothing to do with helping entities in the Bitcoin community in need of funds.

Honestly, as long as the money goes to causes that aren't affiliated with them (as in, they aren't just giving money to themselves), I really don't see a problem.

I don't either, but why not just simply issue a press release saying BFL is going to donate 1,000 bitcoins and please submit an email to us for funding requests? I would have never solicited BFL due to my relationship with their operating officer.


This is a direct quote from their website http://www.bitcoindf.org/:

The Bitcoin development fund was created to support projects that benefit the greater bitcoin community.  Our first donation of 1,000 BTC was made by Butterfly Labs which is a bitcoin mining hardware manufacturer.  If you would like to donate or become a member of our charity selection board, please email submit@bitcoindf.org or send BTC to 1ERVh27gZfPSDaaagL9R3W12xpMJ38ZBA7.

From Josh:

You badmouth BFL and me every chance you get and you want a handout?  Yeah right, get real.  What kind of drugs are you on?  You should lay off them.

You're as bad as Charlie Hoskins whining for a handout for his bitcoin education project after claiming BFL is a scam. 

This is not an independent foundation, yet they are representing themselves as one.

[malevolent]

It's funny how everyone forgot about the 2nd 1000 BTC by Josh/BFL...

Link?

Here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=197050.0;all

[QuestionAuthority]

Why exactly would BFL give away $200,000? Am I missing something?

[malevolent]

Why exactly would BFL give away $200,000? Am I missing something?

BFL is giving 1000 BTC because they missed their power targets by more than 10%
Josh also offered 1000 BTC separately if they would miss their power targets, so he too has to pay.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Why exactly would BFL give away $200,000? Am I missing something?

BFL is giving 1000 BTC because they missed their power targets by more than 10%
Josh also offered 1000 BTC separately if they would miss their power targets, so he too has to pay.

Oh, that's why he's so defensive about something that should otherwise not affect him personally. I get it now. Yea, conflict of interest. I think he has helped me remove whatever chance in my mind that BFL was honest. If BFL's Sonny K is even remotely honest, he will remove Josh completely from the public eye and issue an apology.

[smoothie]

I think it is safe to say that any comment, post, advertisement by Josh or BFL should be assumed to be a lie or misleading or outright false/mistaken.

If those who support BFL still have not learned this lesson yet, you will soon if you intend on purchasing BFL chips in lieu of your preorders or in addition to them.

BFL's track record is horrible and should pose as a PRIME example of what NOT to do when running a bitcoin business.

[MooC Tals]

Matthew, I hate to say it, but they have a point. You've turned into Bruce Wagner and everyone wants to stay as far away from anything you're involved in as they can. I hope this thread causes a BFL supporter to submit a request for another charity and prove you wrong, though.

The BFL charity fund's transparency and legitimacy is being questioned and your only comment is to generalize the opinions of BFL Josh as being that of "everyone" and try to compare me to a homosexual self-important?

Yes, because that's how bad your rep is. I look forward to others submitting similar requests to BFL.

Is this what we get to look forward to once BFL's ads are paying your forum moderator salary?

Yes.

but only because I could care less that BFL indirectly pays me anything and my opinion on the matter has remained consistent.

I could be wrong here but anyone mindful of the community of bitcoin (what ever that mean today) would be against BFL. Anyone who is smart enough to have run a charity would reconsider asking BFL for funds as I believe they would have done their own research in to BFL and see that the money would only tarnish the validity of their ethics. In other words no honest charity director would come close to considering using the funds of BFL to help others.

To make this even more clear and to give a third example I would never see world vision accepting money from a known mafia boss.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Matthew, I hate to say it, but they have a point. You've turned into Bruce Wagner and everyone wants to stay as far away from anything you're involved in as they can. I hope this thread causes a BFL supporter to submit a request for another charity and prove you wrong, though.

The BFL charity fund's transparency and legitimacy is being questioned and your only comment is to generalize the opinions of BFL Josh as being that of "everyone" and try to compare me to a homosexual self-important?

Yes, because that's how bad your rep is. I look forward to others submitting similar requests to BFL.

Is this what we get to look forward to once BFL's ads are paying your forum moderator salary?

Yes.

but only because I could care less that BFL indirectly pays me anything and my opinion on the matter has remained consistent.

I could be wrong here but anyone mindful of the community of bitcoin (what ever that mean today) would be against BFL. Anyone who is smart enough to have run a charity would reconsider asking BFL for funds as I believe they would have done their own research in to BFL and see that the money would only tarnish the validity of their ethics. In other words no honest charity director would come close to considering using the funds of BFL to help others.

To make this even more clear and to give a third example I would never see world vision accepting money from a known mafia boss.

That is how I felt at first too, but Charles echoes my sentiment-- it didn't seem like BFL involved at all, but a second charity organization founded for the sole purpose of getting those funds out to organizations and projects that needed it. This conference is good for bitcoiners everywhere and is also a non-profit endeavor. Without any published guidelines on what is and isn't okay, there is no reason to assume they wouldn't accept mine or Charles' applications. The problem is, as Charles already said, they're representing it as a second entity, but in fact it's just Josh investing the money privately.

Maged, what about this don't you understand? Are you actually defending this?

[FloridaBear]

One thing became painfully clear when reading this thread: Rather than an independent board managing the "BitcoinDF," it's obvious that Josh and/or others at BFL are directly managing it. Meaning that it is essentially part of BFL.

So far, they appear to have donated 291 BTC to "charities" (I use that term loosely as there are some conflicts of interest IMO). So over 700 BTC are still in their control, and the bet is only 29% satisfied (if you call all of their donation targets "charities").

Apparently, anyone can donate to this fund, which means (if they get any donations), merely donating 1000 BTC is not enough to satisfy the bet, since it was implied that 1000 BTC of their money would be donated. Effectively, the balance of the fund needs to go to 0 to satisfy the bet.

Also, they have been posting TXIDs of each donation; I think it would be valuable if someone tracked these donations and made sure that their obligation has been fulfilled when the fund does finally get to a 0 balance.

[Matthew N. Wright]

One thing became painfully clear when reading this thread: Rather than an independent board managing the "BitcoinDF," it's obvious that Josh and/or others at BFL are directly managing it. Meaning that it is essentially part of BFL.

So far, they appear to have donated 291 BTC to "charities" (I use that term loosely as there are some conflicts of interest IMO). So over 700 BTC are still in their control, and the bet is only 29% satisfied (if you call all of their donation targets "charities").

Apparently, anyone can donate to this fund, which means (if they get any donations), merely donating 1000 BTC is not enough to satisfy the bet, since it was implied that 1000 BTC of their money would be donated. Effectively, the balance of the fund needs to go to 0 to satisfy the bet.

Also, they have been posting TXIDs of each donation; I think it would be valuable if someone tracked these donations and made sure that their obligation has been fulfilled when the fund does finally get to a 0 balance.

Let's get that part straight.

1) They said they'd donate to charities. They didn't, instead donating to a fund.
2) They started the fund to donate to charities, but didn't, instead donating to businesses (non-discernible from investing)
3) What are the businesses they invested in through this fund? Is there a list someplace that can be verified?

[Rassah]

Wait, what? I'm doing accounting for The Conference? I guess I'll have to get off my butt and actually, uh, do... something?

For what it's worth, the money is still BFL's, regardless of what they said about giving it to charities, so I don't fault them for being picky about who gets it and not giving it to those they dislike. As long as it's not going back to them, I don't think it matters if they deny it to someone for personal reasons. The whole point of creating this fund was to help them improve their company image, so it's really up to them to pick which donations would improve it and which won't have any effect. I'm also not sure that The Conference really qualities as a needy cause. Or a charity.

Also, despite horrible business mistakes and fuckups, I don't consider BFL a scam at all. If only because they were always willing to give refunds, and I believe all their reasons for delays, especially since they were honest about making stupid mistakes to cause those delays. Badly run business? Yes. Scam? No. Maybe I'm just gullible. I'll also probably be buying from them once they catch up on backorders and start regular shipments.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Wait, what? I'm doing accounting for The Conference? I guess I'll have to get off my butt and actually, uh, do... something?

For what it's worth, the money is still BFL's, regardless of what they said about giving it to charities, so I don't fault them for being picky about who gets it and not giving it to those they dislike. As long as it's not going back to them, I don't think it matters if they deny it to someone for personal reasons. The whole point of creating this fund was to help them improve their company image, so it's really up to them to pick which donations would improve it and which won't have any effect. I'm also not sure that The Conference really qualities as a needy cause. Or a charity.

Also, despite horrible business mistakes and fuckups, I don't consider BFL a scam at all. If only because they were always willing to give refunds, and I believe all their reasons for delays, especially since they were honest about making stupid mistakes to cause those delays. Badly run business? Yes. Scam? No. Maybe I'm just gullible. I'll also probably be buying from them once they catch up on backorders and start regular shipments.

Again, this isn't even about BFL. This is about the fund that kept them from getting a scammer tag though. If they aren't doing as they say, that *is* the problem, and I agree that neither the conference nor Charles' project are charities. They're not giving the money to charities though apparently (at least that's what they're site says). I don't consider them scammers either (I don't consider Ripple scammers either). I consider them both liars though.

[Rassah]

Actually, the thing that mainly bugs me about this donation is that the money they donated technically isn't theirs. Not until they ship all their backorders, anyway. Until then, it's money they collected from their customers, which belongs to their customers until the money is either returned, or their orders are shipped. So they are basically using the money of the people they have hurt to try to improve their image in the eyes of everyone else. I would have much preferred if they spent that 1000 BTC to either increase their throughput to get products out faster, or split it amongst their customers and sent everyone small refunds.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Actually, the thing that mainly bugs me about this donation is that the money they donated technically isn't theirs. Not until they ship all their backorders, anyway. Until then, it's money they collected from their customers, which belongs to their customers until the money is either returned, or their orders are shipped. So they are basically using the money of the people they have hurt to try to improve their image in the eyes of everyone else. I would have much preferred if they spent that 1000 BTC to either increase their throughput to get products out faster, or split it amongst their customers and sent everyone small refunds.

That's kind of how I feel about Theymos's 6000 BTC in donations for a now 12 month old promise too. Send them back!

[QuestionAuthority]

Wait, what? I'm doing accounting for The Conference? I guess I'll have to get off my butt and actually, uh, do... something?

For what it's worth, the money is still BFL's, regardless of what they said about giving it to charities, so I don't fault them for being picky about who gets it and not giving it to those they dislike. As long as it's not going back to them, I don't think it matters if they deny it to someone for personal reasons. The whole point of creating this fund was to help them improve their company image, so it's really up to them to pick which donations would improve it and which won't have any effect. I'm also not sure that The Conference really qualities as a needy cause. Or a charity.

Also, despite horrible business mistakes and fuckups, I don't consider BFL a scam at all. If only because they were always willing to give refunds, and I believe all their reasons for delays, especially since they were honest about making stupid mistakes to cause those delays. Badly run business? Yes. Scam? No. Maybe I'm just gullible. I'll also probably be buying from them once they catch up on backorders and start regular shipments.

No, they will not be giving away $200,000 because someone on the interwebz gets pissy or calls them names. They are not scammers. That name conjures up images of some snot nosed kid behind a keyboard playing video games and laughing about the couple of guys they suckered on a stupid forum. These guys are professional grifters that set out on a mission to swindle as many people as they can for as long as they can. If I were going to do a long con I would also refund a few people to keep up appearances and make up the lost funds by charging the remaining marks $300-$500 shipping (which is what they have done).

I have to agree with Matthew on this one. It's very concerning that the supposedly "main forum" for Bitcoin continues to take advertising dollars from a manufacturer that sells a product and doesn't deliver for a year. That makes it seem as if the forum is in on the scam. So is Bitcoin just a scam? It's enough to make new visitors to this site wonder.

My question is still unanswered so I will rephrase. Why would any of you believe that BFL would give $200,000 dollars of conned money away because someone on a chat forum is bitchy or complains? No one is that stupid.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Wait, what? I'm doing accounting for The Conference? I guess I'll have to get off my butt and actually, uh, do... something?

For what it's worth, the money is still BFL's, regardless of what they said about giving it to charities, so I don't fault them for being picky about who gets it and not giving it to those they dislike. As long as it's not going back to them, I don't think it matters if they deny it to someone for personal reasons. The whole point of creating this fund was to help them improve their company image, so it's really up to them to pick which donations would improve it and which won't have any effect. I'm also not sure that The Conference really qualities as a needy cause. Or a charity.

Also, despite horrible business mistakes and fuckups, I don't consider BFL a scam at all. If only because they were always willing to give refunds, and I believe all their reasons for delays, especially since they were honest about making stupid mistakes to cause those delays. Badly run business? Yes. Scam? No. Maybe I'm just gullible. I'll also probably be buying from them once they catch up on backorders and start regular shipments.

No, they will not be giving away $200,000 because someone on the interwebz gets pissy or calls them names. They are not scammers. That name conjures up images of some snot nosed kid behind a keyboard playing video games and laughing about the couple of guys they suckered on a stupid forum. These guys are professional grifters that set out on a mission to swindle as many people as they can for as long as they can. If I were going to do a long con I would also refund a few people to keep up appearances and make up the lost funds by charging the remaining marks $300-$500 shipping (which is what they have done).

I have to agree with Matthew on this one. It's very concerning that the supposedly "main forum" for Bitcoin continues to take advertising dollars from a manufacturer that sells a product and doesn't deliver for a year. That makes it seem as if the forum is in on the scam. So is Bitcoin just a scam? It's enough to make new visitors to this site wonder.

My question is still unanswered so I will rephrase. Why would any of you believe that BFL would give $200,000 dollars of conned money away because someone on a chat forum is bitchy or complains? No one is that stupid.

Well, I'm giving about that much away on a forum for making a prank bet and trying to make up for it. There are apparently stupid people everywhere. 

[QuestionAuthority]

Wait, what? I'm doing accounting for The Conference? I guess I'll have to get off my butt and actually, uh, do... something?

For what it's worth, the money is still BFL's, regardless of what they said about giving it to charities, so I don't fault them for being picky about who gets it and not giving it to those they dislike. As long as it's not going back to them, I don't think it matters if they deny it to someone for personal reasons. The whole point of creating this fund was to help them improve their company image, so it's really up to them to pick which donations would improve it and which won't have any effect. I'm also not sure that The Conference really qualities as a needy cause. Or a charity.

Also, despite horrible business mistakes and fuckups, I don't consider BFL a scam at all. If only because they were always willing to give refunds, and I believe all their reasons for delays, especially since they were honest about making stupid mistakes to cause those delays. Badly run business? Yes. Scam? No. Maybe I'm just gullible. I'll also probably be buying from them once they catch up on backorders and start regular shipments.

No, they will not be giving away $200,000 because someone on the interwebz gets pissy or calls them names. They are not scammers. That name conjures up images of some snot nosed kid behind a keyboard playing video games and laughing about the couple of guys they suckered on a stupid forum. These guys are professional grifters that set out on a mission to swindle as many people as they can for as long as they can. If I were going to do a long con I would also refund a few people to keep up appearances and make up the lost funds by charging the remaining marks $300-$500 shipping (which is what they have done).

I have to agree with Matthew on this one. It's very concerning that the supposedly "main forum" for Bitcoin continues to take advertising dollars from a manufacturer that sells a product and doesn't deliver for a year. That makes it seem as if the forum is in on the scam. So is Bitcoin just a scam? It's enough to make new visitors to this site wonder.

My question is still unanswered so I will rephrase. Why would any of you believe that BFL would give $200,000 dollars of conned money away because someone on a chat forum is bitchy or complains? No one is that stupid.

Well, I'm giving about that much away on a forum for making a prank bet and trying to make up for it. There are apparently stupid people everywhere. 

You are not giving away $200k for that stupid bet and if you are you're nuts. You know why I didn't bet against you back then? Because if you lost I knew you could never cover the bet and it be pointless to bet. You don't really believe I'm some sort of genius and I'm the only one that understood that do you? Everyone betting had to know you could never cover the bet and if they did lose 90% of them would have stiffed you anyway. You are a major fuck-up for pulling that shit but I don't just blame you. I blame the other parties too. You screwed your rep with all bitcoiners by doing that stupid stunt and made all the businesses that were working with you distance themselves. It really is a shame.