BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes)

[togoshigekata]

Gridcoin was launched October 16th, 2013,
This means Rob potentially has over 5 1/2 years experience working on cryptocurrencies
Amazing!

[coinsinspect]

Starting tomorrow, no day job, no irons in the fire (except God's Kingdom), 100% BiblePay.  Let's streamline this baby and blow the doors off the crypto-market and rocket up to #25!

Don't forget to rest a bit and enjoy life.
God bless you good man 

[shorty34]

Guys, using the word scam in this thread is pure insult.

We have our issues like every community, mostly circling around democracy and the voice of community members; but even the loudest opposition here does not claim we were scammed.

I for one, strongly think and voice the need for Rob to slow down on changes and consult more with community members.

I have invested in this coin, and lost some money. But so has Rob. We are all on the same boat here.

What gives me some peace of mind is that this coin, successful or not in the market, managed to send over $150k to the needy. If you have any evidence against that, I will be the first to distribute this info all over social media. But until then, please refrain from such allegations.

[bible_pay]

Daemonko, you have been warned - please dont post here again otherwise the btctalk mods will ban you and you will lose your privileges everywhere.

[bible_pay]

Guys, using the word scam in this thread is pure insult.

We have our issues like every community, mostly circling around democracy and the voice of community members; but even the loudest opposition here does not claim we were scammed.

I for one, strongly think and voice the need for Rob to slow down on changes and consult more with community members.

I have invested in this coin, and lost some money. But so has Rob. We are all on the same boat here.

What gives me some peace of mind is that this coin, successful or not in the market, managed to send over $150k to the needy. If you have any evidence against that, I will be the first to distribute this info all over social media. But until then, please refrain from such allegations.

I realize we have been through an absolutely massive amount of changes and this is partially because the IT requirements list in this project has expanded beyond the original scope
 required for a launch and then software maintenance (even for a DAC).

But let me put your mind at ease in a couple areas.  Inside the Evo release, we are no longer looking at individual requirements to fulfill an objective.  We are now actually making a generic extensible abstraction layer that I believe can handle all of the DAC requirements in the future. (Including decentralized orphanage contracts and Cioccolanti's integration ideas and web tipping and HTML5 and all that).

So what this means is the end is coming for continual changes (and I don't want those either, I'm on board with this).
The other very large item is our change to be rebase proof that is coming.  Starting in Evo, we are going to release code in a way where we continually honor Dash's future prod commits as they commit also (meaning this will future proof biblepay).

Regarding the actual content you do have a say.  Please join us in the testnet thread and test Evo and paste wishlist items.  I want Evo to be easy to use for everyone + Grandma.  

Finally, even though Evo looks daunting because of acronyms, we are still going to create a dashboard for Grandma towards the end of the cycle so you can drive Evo like a normal car.

[bible_pay]

...

Enjoy your bitcointalk ban.  

[bible_pay]

For family members who don't believe we are in the end-times:

https://wiki.biblepay.org/Imminence_of_Jesus

[noxpost]

For family members who don't believe we are in the end-times:

https://wiki.biblepay.org/Imminence_of_Jesus

Excellent summary! I added a note in the talk page - travelling this week and don't have time to contribute the way I want to, but I'm willing to jump in on that when I return.

[bible_pay]

I spoke to RattleR at GIN today and he confirmed they have upgraded their platform to handle Deterministic Sanctuaries (Evolution).

So this is a positive thing for us as we will not be hindered while transitioning.

[bible_pay]

We are only a few days away from testing Deterministic-Sancs here:
https://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=391.msg5798#msg5798

Please help us in testnet after the next version is released.

[jamescowens]

Rob,

I wanted to thank you for your very gracious letter to the Gridcoin community, and for the smooth transition to the current core group at Gridcoin, of which I am a member. I feel we have a very talented group of developers and other leaders that will continue to carry forward what you created. May God bless you for success with BiblePay!

Best regards,

Jim Owens

[bible_pay]

Rob,

I wanted to thank you for your very gracious letter to the Gridcoin community, and for the smooth transition to the current core group at Gridcoin, of which I am a member. I feel we have a very talented group of developers and other leaders that will continue to carry forward what you created. May God bless you for success with BiblePay!

Best regards,

Jim Owens

Thank you Jim, I appreciate the dedication and the comments and updates.

And I want you to know that I am all for working hand-in-hand with the Gridcoin Organization in the future (from a Biblepay/Gridcoin integration perspective) in sharing future features that will help both communities after we finish our first stable version of Evo towards the end of 2019 (after we release Christian spaces and the homomorphic encryption project) and Gridcoin finishes the Neural Network, then we can circle back and see what kinds of complementary value we can provide each other.

In the mean time I wish you the richest blessings.

[noxpost]

OK, I admit, I'm a little bit angry. Frustrated. But I've reflected, and prayed, and I feel like I should say something. (I should also say this has nothing to do with Jim's post above, which was much appreciated!)

There is no good to be found in gleeful schadenfreude. In trying to be Christ-like, people may be corrected in love, or even disagreed with sternly. Opinions and voices can get raised. But at no point should we be celebrating hard times or trials that come to another person.

Anyone who does that just doesn't have a place in this community. That's on BCT, discord, reddit, the BBP forum, SX, etc. Can I stop anyone? No, absolutely not. I can't control anyone. But I will say strongly and pleadingly that hate doesn't belong here. No one should defame another, no one should wish ill will on a group trying their best to serve Christ, even if it is happening in a way that isn't what you would do.

If you don't like the policies, or the changes, or the price, or the roadmap, or the people, then I don't know why you're here. To stir up trouble? To shame people into change? I don't know, but I can't stay silent.

Please, if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go. Get involved in another coin, another mission. Challenging is fine, debating is fine, but I just can't see any value in celebrating hard times or spreading rumors. It helps nobody. Not you (if you are a holder now, at least), not those who benefit from the charitable donations, and not those interested outside parties who might learn more about Christ through our community.

I'm going to suggest something that probably won't be popular...but it's a suggestion nonetheless. In times of great disappointment, personal conflict, etc I would recommend the following steps:
1) Talk to God about it, honestly. Tell Him you're upset, that you're hurt, that what the other person did hurt you.
2) Ask Him to help you see in the other person what He sees. Ask for help to forgive. Admit that you may have hurt the other person in ways you don't recognize.
3) Admit that you don't know how to reconcile the situation, and that you can't change the other person. Ask God to work in your heart, and in the other party's, to be a better reflection of Him to the world.
4) Pray that the other person gets what you feel they lack. Do they lack wisdom? Are their hearts pointed in the wrong direction? Are they quick to anger and slow to listen, hard-headed? Petition Him to make the other person more complete, more whole, and more joyful. Pray that they receive the fruits of the spirit and that God would draw them close.
5) Ask for an opportunity, divinely provided, for you to be a part of the change, in the way that God would want. Ask too for Him to work powerfully in you, and for Him to do the things in you that only He can.
6) Ask for peace of mind. Ask that God would take the hurt and anger, and allow you to rest in the Creator's goodness.
7) Wait. God's work isn't done on command, in seconds. He works His way, in His time. Rest and take comfort in Him.

I'm also going to throw out a non-biblical reference to the serenity prayer, that old standard. Serenity, peace - accepting that we can't change certain situations (or people) ourselves. Courage to take steps to be our best, to make amends when necessary, to look deeply at ourselves. And Wisdom - God's wisdom, not man's - to understand what is "our" problem to solve, and what is "His."

I wish you all the healing and comfort of a God who forgives all, and grants the peace promised in Romans 5:1.

[secoccular]

I appreciate the thought behind the post. I will have to disagree mildly with this part:

" if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go"

The problem is, who gets to define what "bashing our mission and implementation" is? If the implementation has problems, I say go ahead and bash it. It's when projects only have "yes men" attached, do they truly go off the rails. "Bashing" is really in the eye of those who feel slighted. IMO. the project has made some funky decisions, and it's stirred things up in the community. Am I being negative feeling that way? Maybe.

I'm not suggesting people bring bad attitudes to their posts. I am suggesting that anyone who thinks they know exactly what appropriate criticism is and isn't, is probably not speaking for everybody. The problem is nobody can seem to define the edge where valid criticism becomes unproductive. There's a whole gray area between cheerleading and being slovakia. We should make sure and no alienate anyone who feels alienated, that they are heard. For those that just want to post nonsense let's just smile.

If Christianity and any of us here are so thin-skinned that we can't take some bashing, then maybe our little coin isn't ready for top 200 yet? I don't get why we get so thin-skinned among ourselves, and hope to change the world?

When people get down to "love it or leave it", it's usually a sign of some serious problems. Nobody wants baseless negativity, and nobody really wants censorship either. I'd like to see us take criticism in stride with a genuine smile and interest. Fighting negativity only gives it power. Let the mods do their cleanup, and let's press on.

[bible_pay]

OK, I admit, I'm a little bit angry. Frustrated. But I've reflected, and prayed, and I feel like I should say something. (I should also say this has nothing to do with Jim's post above, which was much appreciated!)

There is no good to be found in gleeful schadenfreude. In trying to be Christ-like, people may be corrected in love, or even disagreed with sternly. Opinions and voices can get raised. But at no point should we be celebrating hard times or trials that come to another person.

Anyone who does that just doesn't have a place in this community. That's on BCT, discord, reddit, the BBP forum, SX, etc. Can I stop anyone? No, absolutely not. I can't control anyone. But I will say strongly and pleadingly that hate doesn't belong here. No one should defame another, no one should wish ill will on a group trying their best to serve Christ, even if it is happening in a way that isn't what you would do.

If you don't like the policies, or the changes, or the price, or the roadmap, or the people, then I don't know why you're here. To stir up trouble? To shame people into change? I don't know, but I can't stay silent.

Please, if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go. Get involved in another coin, another mission. Challenging is fine, debating is fine, but I just can't see any value in celebrating hard times or spreading rumors. It helps nobody. Not you (if you are a holder now, at least), not those who benefit from the charitable donations, and not those interested outside parties who might learn more about Christ through our community.

I'm going to suggest something that probably won't be popular...but it's a suggestion nonetheless. In times of great disappointment, personal conflict, etc I would recommend the following steps:
1) Talk to God about it, honestly. Tell Him you're upset, that you're hurt, that what the other person did hurt you.
2) Ask Him to help you see in the other person what He sees. Ask for help to forgive. Admit that you may have hurt the other person in ways you don't recognize.
3) Admit that you don't know how to reconcile the situation, and that you can't change the other person. Ask God to work in your heart, and in the other party's, to be a better reflection of Him to the world.
4) Pray that the other person gets what you feel they lack. Do they lack wisdom? Are their hearts pointed in the wrong direction? Are they quick to anger and slow to listen, hard-headed? Petition Him to make the other person more complete, more whole, and more joyful. Pray that they receive the fruits of the spirit and that God would draw them close.
5) Ask for an opportunity, divinely provided, for you to be a part of the change, in the way that God would want. Ask too for Him to work powerfully in you, and for Him to do the things in you that only He can.
6) Ask for peace of mind. Ask that God would take the hurt and anger, and allow you to rest in the Creator's goodness.
7) Wait. God's work isn't done on command, in seconds. He works His way, in His time. Rest and take comfort in Him.

I'm also going to throw out a non-biblical reference to the serenity prayer, that old standard. Serenity, peace - accepting that we can't change certain situations (or people) ourselves. Courage to take steps to be our best, to make amends when necessary, to look deeply at ourselves. And Wisdom - God's wisdom, not man's - to understand what is "our" problem to solve, and what is "His."

I wish you all the healing and comfort of a God who forgives all, and grants the peace promised in Romans 5:1.

Thanks a lot Nox!

I know that this post resonates well with those who want to be merciful, as Jesus wants us to be.  For those who look past prior flaws, and want to do the greater good for the community.

It does not resonate well with people who think you are picking on them, or calling out flaws in people - but this is truly constructive criticism.

It reminds me of a productive way to rate another persons positive attributes:  their character and their capability.  If I were to talk to you on the phone for 5 minutes, I would immediately be reminded that :  You had a high level of moral character, and that you had a positive capability.  (You were interested in improving our POBH bluepaper, and you immediately helped instead of complaining).  I wrote these notes down in my guide for 'reputation scores' as I think these will be beneficial in the future.  Obviously, we would be very sensitive to normal users who just mine with biblepay, but I do believe there is a way to establish a Christian presence per user that is edifying for everyone that improves reputation scores for those that act in a good way, and the community destroys those rep scores for people who become a net negative on our community reputation as a whole.

[noxpost]

I appreciate the thought behind the post. I will have to disagree mildly with this part:

" if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go"

The problem is, who gets to define what "bashing our mission and implementation" is? If the implementation has problems, I say go ahead and bash it. It's when projects only have "yes men" attached, do they truly go off the rails. "Bashing" is really in the eye of those who feel slighted. IMO. the project has made some funky decisions, and it's stirred things up in the community. Am I being negative feeling that way? Maybe.

I'm not suggesting people bring bad attitudes to their posts. I am suggesting that anyone who thinks they know exactly what appropriate criticism is and isn't, is probably not speaking for everybody. The problem is nobody can seem to define the edge where valid criticism becomes unproductive. There's a whole gray area between cheerleading and being slovakia. We should make sure and no alienate anyone who feels alienated, that they are heard. For those that just want to post nonsense let's just smile.

If Christianity and any of us here are so thin-skinned that we can't take some bashing, then maybe our little coin isn't ready for top 200 yet? I don't get why we get so thin-skinned among ourselves, and hope to change the world?

When people get down to "love it or leave it", it's usually a sign of some serious problems. Nobody wants baseless negativity, and nobody really wants censorship either. I'd like to see us take criticism in stride with a genuine smile and interest. Fighting negativity only gives it power. Let the mods do their cleanup, and let's press on.

Thanks for the response.

I agree that there can't be a "love it or leave it" mentality. Calling out problems and mistakes are fine. Making people feel like trash because of it, or saying they suck, or are a joke, or a scam, or don't know what they are doing - that crosses the line to me. I don't THINK we are disagreeing, but yes, if I failed to clarify that it doesn't have to be sunshine and rainbows, let me do that now.

I don't think it is about being thin-skinned, though. Maybe a little, maybe that's fair. But I think it is odd and sad that the more good we try to do, the more negativity is attracted. I know, I know, "haters gonna hate." And sometimes we all make bone-headed mistakes, or bad calls. No point in pretending otherwise.

In any event, I'm trying REALLY hard to live in that gray area you mentioned, I really am.

[bible_pay]

I appreciate the thought behind the post. I will have to disagree mildly with this part:

" if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go"

The problem is, who gets to define what "bashing our mission and implementation" is? If the implementation has problems, I say go ahead and bash it. It's when projects only have "yes men" attached, do they truly go off the rails. "Bashing" is really in the eye of those who feel slighted. IMO. the project has made some funky decisions, and it's stirred things up in the community. Am I being negative feeling that way? Maybe.

I'm not suggesting people bring bad attitudes to their posts. I am suggesting that anyone who thinks they know exactly what appropriate criticism is and isn't, is probably not speaking for everybody. The problem is nobody can seem to define the edge where valid criticism becomes unproductive. There's a whole gray area between cheerleading and being slovakia. We should make sure and no alienate anyone who feels alienated, that they are heard. For those that just want to post nonsense let's just smile.

If Christianity and any of us here are so thin-skinned that we can't take some bashing, then maybe our little coin isn't ready for top 200 yet? I don't get why we get so thin-skinned among ourselves, and hope to change the world?

When people get down to "love it or leave it", it's usually a sign of some serious problems. Nobody wants baseless negativity, and nobody really wants censorship either. I'd like to see us take criticism in stride with a genuine smile and interest. Fighting negativity only gives it power. Let the mods do their cleanup, and let's press on.

Thanks, I like your points, and agree, none of us should be so thin skinned that we can't take things personally.

I do have an idea that would go miles here.  I don't know if its a pet peeve of mine or not, but bear with me.

One of the biggest things that gets under my skin is a half-true post - something that the person didn't verify and they post it here (which is nefarious) because its deceptive.  Its unlawfully trying to get a response from the group, and deceiving investors while we wait.

An example I saw in SX recently was a few of our banned members got together and said that I bought 25 more sancs so that I could vote on the mid-tier sanc consolidation poll and win.  Whats funny is the whole thing is questionable; they dont know that I actually bought them, they dont know my correct wallet total and they should not be concerned about it to begin with (as foundation funds dont go through it), and I dont need 25 more to win anyway (as it is already above 8 anyway), then they went on to say that in the past I use to steal orphan funds from the foundation and they are now suing me for it personally.  So I am saying, what kind of character is that?  Derelict character, people who want to spread lies about us to damage our rep.  

Even one ounce of a lie is not welcome here.  The post should be syntactically correct and 100% true.  If its not true, it should be a QUESTION.  Then the response will be constructive.  
So its not about being thin skinned in this case its about being Accurate.

The same happened a long time ago when inblue posted something that I was hiding proposals.  We all know now that this rule only affected pool.biblepay.org's display characteristics for a replacement poll.  It was never for the core wallet (core wallet has never pulled any proposals from an API ever).  And it was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.  Then I saw some kind of "proof" in the post with txid's showing that I hid the first proposal.  Yes, it was proof that two proposals were in the system and both were able to be seen in the core wallet.  The latter one was valid for voting.

So as an example, if inblue said "Hey Rob, could you please explain why I see this first instance and this instance"?  I would have never deleted the post.  It was written like "you bast***, you have now been Proven to be a Liar!".   Btw, I have already forgiven him for that as can be seen in the QT thread.

So this is an example of how most character problems start here, I think we all need to hold ourselves to a higher standard before clicking send.

[inblue]

The same happened a long time ago when inblue posted something that I was hiding proposals.  We all know now that this rule only affected pool.biblepay.org's display characteristics for a replacement poll.  It was never for the core wallet (core wallet has never pulled any proposals from an API ever).  And it was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.  Then I saw some kind of "proof" in the post with txid's showing that I hid the first proposal.  Yes, it was proof that two proposals were in the system and both were able to be seen in the core wallet.  The latter one was valid for voting.

So as an example, if inblue said "Hey Rob, could you please explain why I see this first instance and this instance"?  I would have never deleted the post.  It was written like "you bast***, you have now been Proven to be a Liar!".   Btw, I have already forgiven him for that as can be seen in the QT thread.

Ah, here we go again... You really shouldn't have used this as an example, now bringing attention to that event again. This sentence of yours is all what is needed to be done with this conflict:

It was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.

So clearly you didn't use the feature as intended, since we were not going overbudget that month. Even if you argue that we were going overbudget, the proposal was immediately reentered for the same month, instead of waiting for the next one. But even if you argue that it could now fit the budget after a tiny BBP reduction, the proposal was evidently rejected and could not win, so it shouldn't be reentered. You misused that feature because the proposal received a lot of negative votes, but you really wanted it to succeed because you already paid from your pocket. It's very simple.

And saying you "forgave" me for my undeniable blockchain proof, what a joke, you are a master of manipulation, because the situation is the other way around - it's only others who can forgive you for your misconduct. You know, you would look like a bigger man if you admitted your mistake and moved on, instead of raging.

[bible_pay]

The same happened a long time ago when inblue posted something that I was hiding proposals.  We all know now that this rule only affected pool.biblepay.org's display characteristics for a replacement poll.  It was never for the core wallet (core wallet has never pulled any proposals from an API ever).  And it was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.  Then I saw some kind of "proof" in the post with txid's showing that I hid the first proposal.  Yes, it was proof that two proposals were in the system and both were able to be seen in the core wallet.  The latter one was valid for voting.

So as an example, if inblue said "Hey Rob, could you please explain why I see this first instance and this instance"?  I would have never deleted the post.  It was written like "you bast***, you have now been Proven to be a Liar!".   Btw, I have already forgiven him for that as can be seen in the QT thread.

Ah, here we go again... You really shouldn't have used this as an example, now bringing attention to that event again. This sentence of yours is all what is needed to be done with this conflict:

It was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.

So clearly you didn't use the feature as intended, since we were not going overbudget that month. Even if you argue that we were going overbudget, the proposal was immediately reentered for the same month, instead of waiting for the next one. But even if you argue that it could now fit the budget after a tiny BBP reduction, the proposal was evidently rejected and could not win, so it shouldn't be reentered. You misused that feature because the proposal received a lot of negative votes, but you really wanted it to succeed because you already paid from your pocket. It's very simple.

And saying you "forgave" me for my undeniable blockchain proof, what a joke, you are a master of manipulation, because the situation is the other way around - it's only others who can forgive you for your misconduct. You know, you would look like a bigger man if you admitted your mistake and moved on, instead of raging.

I have clearly been the bigger man in the respect of how I handled your replies (your mean spirited unwanted comments) at various times.

Incorrect above.  The feature has always been there in "pool.biblepay.org" specifically so that the Proposals list is a distinct list of votable proposals that fits within the budget.  The only way a proposal becomes hidden is if a duplicate is entered with the same name in the same period that is newer -- and it is always entered because the old one will cause us to be over-budget.  As I said before and maintain until now, Ive been asked to re-enter proposals so that we make the payment for compassion (so that we are not over-budget).

You are being argumentative and continue to try to prove that I'm doing something nefarious here.

You need to accept the fact that you are wrong about this, that you didn't ask about it specifically first, instead making an assumption about me - then attacking me.

If you are trying to say this particular proposal is a "one off" and I did something special with it compared to compassions re-entries that is incorrect - many have been duplicates (not one) and all entered with reduced amounts to make the budget work.

Edit:
Ok, I went the extra mile and located the root cause of this disagreement.  It is that your attack says "you've hidden the previous proposal from your website and made a new one, misleading users that there are not so many negative votes on that proposals, and rigging the voting system in your favor, so that your proposal could pass. This is the 100% undeniable truth, with proof on the blockchain which will never go away, no matter how hard you want it.".  

So no that is untrue, because the feature exists for replacement proposals with lower amounts that can be re-voted to fit within the monthly budget, and is limited to the display characteristics of pool.biblepay.org.

On a side note:  Here is why I wanted you to e-mail me.  I don't want this thread cluttered with character attacks and infighting!  I would have explained the Hope for widows proposal specifically if you would taken this seriously and not attempted to make a mockery of this forum.  Thats why I deal with emails, they should be escalated first, and worked out and if you still dont get a resolution, then go ahead and post here in a constructive way.

Regarding the actual hope for widows proposal:  I located it and you are incorrect, I see that :
I entered it on 10-13 for 481,540BBP originally, and it was voted down with -21 votes.   On 10-22 I re-entered A new instance of it with a LOWER AMOUNT (as we do with all resubmitted proposals) for 381,540 (100,000 less) which is a NEW AMOUNT, and we still had plenty of time for everyone to see it and vote on it, and THIS WAS TO MAKE IT FIT WITHIN THE BUDGET Because we Did Not enter Compassions amount until 10-23!  So I am basically saying- look this group voted my original amount down, we need 4.34 MM for compassion, Ill try to go for Less, and enter compassion right now!     Both proposals of HFW were visible in the core wallet (as they always were) and neither were hidden in the core wallet.  The Second instance in the Pool was the only one visible because it was a Duplicate proposal according to the Business Rule.  Any sanc should be on top of voting if they wanted to Re-vote this precious proposal that I staked the money up front for hope-for-widows for and I also say it was pretty depressing to vote this proposal down in light of who we were helping.  And finally, if You entered a proposal for HFW for 500,000 and it was voted down, you could have emailed me that you want one for 400,000 and want another chance to get reimbursed since you lost, and I would have Paid the 2,500 fee for it and entered it for you in the pool (this feature is not for me, its for every vendor and every user).  Its automatic.

So I just wanted to see if I posted anything on the forum after re-entering HFW, and I did say on the forum: "no problem I will re-enter the losing proposal for a new amount and tithe the rest" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.msg47153740#msg47153740.  So as you can see, I was not hiding the re-entered amount.

[bible_pay]

I appreciate the thought behind the post. I will have to disagree mildly with this part:

" if your post is mean-spirited or bashing on our mission, team, or implementation, just go"

The problem is, who gets to define what "bashing our mission and implementation" is? If the implementation has problems, I say go ahead and bash it. It's when projects only have "yes men" attached, do they truly go off the rails. "Bashing" is really in the eye of those who feel slighted. IMO. the project has made some funky decisions, and it's stirred things up in the community. Am I being negative feeling that way? Maybe.

I'm not suggesting people bring bad attitudes to their posts. I am suggesting that anyone who thinks they know exactly what appropriate criticism is and isn't, is probably not speaking for everybody. The problem is nobody can seem to define the edge where valid criticism becomes unproductive. There's a whole gray area between cheerleading and being slovakia. We should make sure and no alienate anyone who feels alienated, that they are heard. For those that just want to post nonsense let's just smile.

If Christianity and any of us here are so thin-skinned that we can't take some bashing, then maybe our little coin isn't ready for top 200 yet? I don't get why we get so thin-skinned among ourselves, and hope to change the world?

When people get down to "love it or leave it", it's usually a sign of some serious problems. Nobody wants baseless negativity, and nobody really wants censorship either. I'd like to see us take criticism in stride with a genuine smile and interest. Fighting negativity only gives it power. Let the mods do their cleanup, and let's press on.

Thanks for the response.

I agree that there can't be a "love it or leave it" mentality. Calling out problems and mistakes are fine. Making people feel like trash because of it, or saying they suck, or are a joke, or a scam, or don't know what they are doing - that crosses the line to me. I don't THINK we are disagreeing, but yes, if I failed to clarify that it doesn't have to be sunshine and rainbows, let me do that now.

I don't think it is about being thin-skinned, though. Maybe a little, maybe that's fair. But I think it is odd and sad that the more good we try to do, the more negativity is attracted. I know, I know, "haters gonna hate." And sometimes we all make bone-headed mistakes, or bad calls. No point in pretending otherwise.

In any event, I'm trying REALLY hard to live in that gray area you mentioned, I really am.

Stick to your guns, there is a love it or leave it mentality in extreme circumstances.

We are commanded to forgive but after being trashed a few times and having our orphan sponsorship levels hurt because of people who could care less if we live or die (for example when Slovakia said to me, why dont you just hang yourself, maybe Rob will kill himself etc), they actually do not care about us at all.  Sure I care about others, I will pray for them and pray that they repent and turn from their behavior.  And not give up on them.  But after a few times, I think we have the right to ask for an apology according to the bible (Matthew 18) but we should forgive a person who seeks to be forgiven.  

If the person is asked to apologize and they dont repent, we should cut all ties with them, as to me that proves they aren't Christian.  Christians forgive and love and attempt to mend.  Non Christians come to steal, kill, and destroy a project.  We have something here to protect:  the integrity of the project, the investors stakes, the orphan sponsorship levels, our own integrity, etc.  We shouldn't lose all this because of the 10% that have demons.

It's similar to how the Jews stoned a person that was a net negative for the community.  

And as far as the community goes, they should be more courageous and stand up for the greater good (not cowardly and cowering down and being afraid of the derelicts).

Let me see if I can think of an example of another business, in a certain business I remember from 10 years ago, if you badmouth the rep on the phone your account is frozen and you can no longer use the account, and all the reps behind the desk have to adhere to the frozen status "You are not in good standing"  "Go to another provider".  DONT DO IT.  

We deserve to treat each other with respect here.