[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation Board Election Details Announced

[Rassah]

And here I thought I just barely managed to get in, when I sent my application at 11:58pm on the day it was due 

[1714172650]

1714172650

[1714172650]

1714172650

[1714172650]

1714172650

[1714172650]

1714172650

[1714172650]

1714172650

[1714172650]

1714172650

[QuestionAuthority]

I support Luke Dashjr because I think he and Gavin need to spend more time together. lol

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

[gweedo]

I support Luke Dashjr because I think he and Gavin need to spend more time together. lol

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

That would be the LULZ of the year right here LMAO

[joecooin]

I am going to vote for whoever will best represent the members and interests of this forum. 

Now I wonder what that could be in your opinion.

Can you elaborate on this?

Joe

[Rassah]

I am impressed. Elizabeth apparently makes a great politician and communications manager. Her skills at using many words to say little, and answering questions with very long "feel-good" speeches that lack substance and never actually address the question, is very impressive. In fact, her words are such an inspiration, that I am now quite motivated to work pro-bono as an "individual" liaison, to represent the community to the foundation and vise versa (a position I am convinced will still be wide open after the election is over), even if I should I loose. Elizabeth would likely make an excellent lobbyist though, representing "the individual" to politicians.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Detective Phinn, you've been serving the community for quite some time now...are you interested in running?

inquiring minds want to know Detective Phinn.

I wasn't yet a member of the TBF. Besides, there are much better choices than I, presently, to best fill the position.

[dwdoc]

I am going to vote for whoever will best represent the members and interests of this forum. 

Now I wonder what that could be in your opinion.

Can you elaborate on this?

Joe

Elizabeth T. Ploshay?
Rassah?

[jackjack]

I support Luke Dashjr because I think he and Gavin need to spend more time together. lol

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

I hope the meetings are recorded

[Rassah]

I support Luke Dashjr because I think he and Gavin need to spend more time together. lol

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

I hope the meetings are recorded

Luke is an extreme introvert iRL, keeping very quiet and to himself unless asked something directly. At the San Jose conference, he was like some ghost, slinking around the entire conference without saying anything or being noticed. So I doubt him and Gavin being in the same room will be as entertaining as him and Gavin on the same forum.

[Arto]

[jackjack]

I support Luke Dashjr because I think he and Gavin need to spend more time together. lol

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

I hope the meetings are recorded

Luke is an extreme introvert iRL, keeping very quiet and to himself unless asked something directly. At the San Jose conference, he was like some ghost, slinking around the entire conference without saying anything or being noticed. So I doubt him and Gavin being in the same room will be as entertaining as him and Gavin on the same forum.

Shame

[Arto]

Here are the current candidates for the individual seat:
Elizabeth T. Ploshay
Edward Clements (edd)
Duncan Goldie-Scot
Nilam Doctor
Christian Kammler
Ben Davenport (bpd)
Trace Mayer
Luke Dashjr (Luke-Jr)
Dmitry Murashchik (Rassah)
Aaron Lasher (chalash)
Noah Silverman (noah977)
Pedro Fernandes
Ryan Deming
Joerg Platzer

Theymos, would you please update your list to link in Joerg "Joe" Platzer's user account here (joecooin) as well?

[theymos]

I am impressed. Elizabeth apparently makes a great politician and communications manager. Her skills at using many words to say little, and answering questions with very long "feel-good" speeches that lack substance and never actually address the question, is very impressive. In fact, her words are such an inspiration, that I am now quite motivated to work pro-bono as an "individual" liaison, to represent the community to the foundation and vise versa (a position I am convinced will still be wide open after the election is over), even if I should I loose. Elizabeth would likely make an excellent lobbyist though, representing "the individual" to politicians.

The board member will be spending 99% of his/her time on non-controversial outreach, political efforts, etc. For this, I believe that Elizabeth is the best candidate due to her experience with politics and communication. In the unlikely event that she would have to decide on something important, her statements convince me that she is one of the most likely candidates to decide correctly. Some of her articles/speeches are low in substance (true of almost all politicians), but she has also made detailed and explicit statements about her platform:

At points, standardizing Bitcoin may appear as an attractive option to some, but we must be leary of any centralized control of Bitcoin and the Bitcoin QT open source project.

In the end of the day, an individual knows best, and government does not know best.

Across the board, less regulation is better.

Should I be elected to serve in this open seat, I would honor Martti Malmi’s current ownership of Bitcoin.org as a standalone organization.

Ideally, I would like the Bitcoin Foundation to do a better job of pointing people to these key educational sources whether bitcoin.org, news sites, success stories of Bitcoin related businesses, bitcointalk.org, and other forums where the purpose and goals of the Bitcoin community are exemplified.

Satoshi stated, “What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.”  One of the ideological tenets I hold to is limited government and a general principle that government and centralized sources of control do NOT know what is best for the majority of individuals.  Individual responsibility and interaction in the financial sector leads to greater economic growth.

I do commit to respect the 21 million limit and will not support any attempt to increase it. Anything with a limit other than 21 million isn't Bitcoin, it's an altcoin.

... any attempts to diminish the fungibility or open source nature of Bitcoin  will be met by a firm "no thanks" from me, both as a individual member of the Bitcoin community, and as a member of the Bitcoin Foundation Board of Directors. Fortunately, the current decentralized, open source characteristics of Bitcoin safeguard against any such attempts, but that does not relieve us from opposing any efforts to the contrary.

Barring unforeseen/distant circumstances such as quantum computing breakthroughs that render SHA256 an ineffective tool for performing its role in securing the network, it must remain.

This is really just a boring political job more than anything, without much potential for abuse or excellence. (If it was an important position, I would have nominated myself...) The way the Foundation is set up, a single board member is unable to do much. A single board member has essentially no chance of convincing the Foundation to, e.g., issue harmful Bitcoin network edicts. The worst thing that a single board member is likely to do is say something very damaging to Bitcoin's reputation ("Everyone should use Bitcoin for tax evasion and money laundering!"), especially since it's difficult for the board to remove a board member. It's unlikely that Elizabeth will make this mistake, and she'll be able to use the position to effectively lead lobbying efforts, reach out to non-Bitcoiners, etc.

[Rassah]

^^ These are views and positions that pretty much all of us hold, though. And maybe I misunderstood what the purpose of the position was. But you're pretty much right that she would be best if all that will be required is to write up communication memos and talk to politicians.

P.S. No, I'm not being a "sore looser," being upset because I might not win. I'm not expecting to, anyway, as there are a lot of really qualified competitors in this race. I'm honestly just concerned that the candidate most likely to win the "individual board member" position may be someone who has pretty much no ties to the community, especially when the general concern I keep hearing about the Foundation is the view that they are an "exclusive club of self-elected elitists" who don't represent, or care about, or have any ties to the Bitcoin community as a whole. Though that's not true, and I don't know if the Foundation even cares about getting support from the overall user base (they may not need it if their main goal is to focus on bringing in business support), but if they do, Elizabeth will have a lot of work ahead of her.

[Arto]

^^ These are views and positions that almost all of us hold, though. And maybe I misunderstood what the purpose of the position was. But you're pretty much right that she would be best if all that will be required is to write up communication memos and talk to politicians.

You make the job description sound like that of a secretary ...I have to say I'm a little surprised by Theymos's endorsement of Ploshay. Now that the Foundation is under Jon Matonis's leadership, there's going to be less lobbying in Washington D.C. and more of an international, non-Empire focus. So, we don't need more D.C. lobbyists.

The most accomplished of the candidates in effecting actual real-world change is Joerg Platzer, owner of Room 77, the first brick-and-mortar establishment in the world to accept bitcoin payments and these days the host for our regular bitcoin gatherings here in Berlin. An entrepreneur with a background in strategic corporate communications, Joerg has put Berlin and Bitcoin on the map. As I posted over on the Foundation forums:

I just wanted to pop in here to add in a good word for Joerg. His leadership in single-handedly bootstrapping the world's first local bitcoin economy here in Berlin make him the obvious Board candidate to help steer the Foundation in the right direction--hopefully helping to replicate bitcoin's success in Berlin also in a multitude of other locales around the world.

Right now pretty much every time we have a bitcoin gathering (organized and hosted by Joerg) here in Berlin, we have local and international journalists and film crews attending. The amount of ongoing media buzz Room 77 and the other bitcoin businesses and gatherings here are generating is just ridiculous and is a testament to the PR genius of the tireless dynamo named Joerg Platzer.

It is no exaggeration to say that Berlin would hardly even be on the bitcoin world map (any more than other nearby capitals such as Prague or Bratislava) without Joerg. Thanks to his efforts over the last three years, we are not only on the map but have become internationally known as the "Bitcoin Mecca", the go-to place to see bitcoin in action at its current full potential. At the regular gatherings, we have visitors from all over the world who've come here to experience the Berlin miracle firsthand. At the August monthly meeting three weeks ago, we had visitors from at least Texas, Colorado, New Hampshire, Slovakia, Austria, Spain, and Russia. Those were just the ones I happened to chat with. A number of people from at least Vienna and Bratislava regularly commute here (6+ hours on the bus or train) for these gatherings. Again, it seems doubtful that much of this would be the case without Joerg, the guy who made it all happen.

Joerg has my vote, and you ought to consider giving him yours, too. With Jon Matonis and Joerg Platzer in leadership positions at the Foundation, the future will look so bright that I'll have to put on my shades!

Read about Joerg's accomplishments in making Berlin the center of gravity for bitcoin in Europe (and beyond), watch his countless media appearances, listen to his Q&A for Let's Talk Bitcoin the other day, and then tell me there is a better candidate. Certainly there are a few other good candidates I might vote for if Joerg wasn't running, but he is running, so there is just no contest.

Here's Joerg's take on the internationalization of the Foundation and the necessity to be looking beyond the U.S.:

If the eye of Sauron is upon you GTFO of Mordor!

The foundation is based in and under the jurisdiction of the US of A. The USA is an absurdly overregulated economy with a regime that is trying to abolish privacy in all aspects of people's lives and thus the most hostile environment for Bitcoin on this planet. The fact that the majority of the current members of the foundation board runs rather big businesses that are dependend on the goodwill of that regime does not really make things better.

It is a no-brainer to demand the foundation being internationalised and based in a more freedom-affine country that embraces innovation instead of trying to keep the status quo by all means. We should promote the creation of several independant foundations, associations, societies or organisations, be they defined geographically or focussed on certain aspects of crypto economics or certain goals of their members.

Any satoshi spent on 'lobbying for Bitcoin in Washington' is an irresponsible waste of money donated by members of the Bitcoin community in good faith. And it will take us exactly nowhere.

[Rassah]

I'm wondering if Joerg's talents may not be wasted there. Bitcoin Foundation's current goals seem to be pretty focused on marching right into Mordor and keeping Sauron's armies from stomping all over everything. I'm almost wondering if there shouldn't just be other foundations in other countries that focus on local issues and developers, since there are definitely a ton of localized issues and a ton of talented developers around Europe (our best Android wallets and wallet hardware seem to come from there  ). I'd say decentralize the foundations to keep them from being too vulnerable to any single country or group's infighting, while allowing the separate groups to focus specifically on their local strengths and issues,. And I'd say US's obsession with wanting to regulate everything new is quite a massive issue for the established foundation to fight. For example, with their focus on Washington,  I haven't heard the foundation mention anything about the customs issues that have been plaguing the ASIC businesses in China, or the banking issues around UK that have made buying or selling bitcoins a major pain there.

But yes I'll probably vote for him. And would definitely support him should he decide to start his own organization in Germany.

[Arto]

There are definitely a ton of localized issues and a ton of talented developers around Europe (our best Android wallets and wallet hardware seem to come from there  ).

Yes, as it happens Andreas Schildbach, the developer of Android Wallet for Android, is based here in Berlin and indeed is a core member of Joerg's Crypto Economics Consulting Group who help (free of charge!) businesses in Berlin get started accepting bitcoin payments.

That's the Bitcoinkiez project (German for "Bitcoin Hood"), the Berlin neighborhood that has the highest density of Bitcoin-accepting businesses in the world. A highly successful model that ought to be emulated anywhere and everywhere around the world, and the Foundation could conceivably provide some of the auspices for that.

[Rassah]

Also, Mycelium is in Europe, as are the Bitcoincard and Trezor. You guys are rocking it over there.

[joecooin]

This is really just a boring political job more than anything, without much potential for abuse or excellence. (If it was an important position, I would have nominated myself...) The way the Foundation is set up, a single board member is unable to do much.

You gotta be kidding Theymos!

'Director' comes from directing things, defining the direction in which to go.

There will be seven on this board so each of them will have one out of seven votes on all issues regarding the direction of the Bitcoin foundation.

You do know that exactly, why else would you post a candidate's views on really important strategical matters if it was only a secretary's job?

I am surprised that you believe we need _more_ lobbying efforts really. I would vote Ben, unfortunately I do not have a vote .

Joe

[joecooin]

Addon to clarify if this position is rather a secretary's or a director's. Let me quote Adam Levine:

"... whoever wins the seats will help influence the direction of the foundation, and represent the interests of the community. It is an important role."

Joe