Bitcoin Foundation should file a lawsuit against BFL

[candoo]

well people,

we have the bitcoin foundation, Why are they ignoring the BFL business practices ?

discuss.

[Axios]

Why should they care. They aren't the bitcoin police.

[SirWizz]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

[Dalkore]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

[Inaba]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

[Dalkore]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.  

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Which conspiracies are you talking about Josh?  You may want to focus on a few fringe "people" but actually I was referring to the group of people who distrust centralization which is a much larger group than you give credit.  

P.S.  Hint, this group is not all "rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts" as you like to characterize them.

[k9quaint]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

The core group is 790 strong and growing. Should Butterfly Labs (BFL) get a Scammer tag?

[Xian01]

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  

 Judging by his posts on these forums, we should take Inaba at his word. The man arguably has extensive first-hand experience with personality disorders.

 I'm not sure I've ever encountered a situation where a company officer publicly refers to his customers with such disdain and malice, and has gone on to become a legitimate, successful business.

[FUKT]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Wherever you go your name is shit. Your piece of shit antics will follow you everywhere. 

[Inaba]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Which conspiracies are you talking about Josh?  You may want to focus on a few fringe "people" but actually I was referring to the group of people who distrust centralization which is a much larger group than you give credit.   

P.S.  Hint, this group is not all "rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts" as you like to characterize them.

Ok, so how would the Bitcoin Foundation "going after" BFL do anything for these people you are referring to?

[Dalkore]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Which conspiracies are you talking about Josh?  You may want to focus on a few fringe "people" but actually I was referring to the group of people who distrust centralization which is a much larger group than you give credit.   

P.S.  Hint, this group is not all "rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts" as you like to characterize them.

Ok, so how would the Bitcoin Foundation "going after" BFL do anything for these people you are referring to?

I don't want them to just "go after" anyone, that is irresponsible.   But there have been some very very valid concerns about some of the claims and and business tactics by Butterfly Labs Inc.  The community, not just the rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts have tried over and over to have you address respectfully and intelligently that in my opinion have not been addressed. 

Josh, you specifically have seemed to go out of your way to make that the most difficult and painful process coming from BFL's head of PR which in the manner you have held yourself, makes you having that title a mockery of all real professional public relations experts, but I digress on that point. 

[Inaba]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.   

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Which conspiracies are you talking about Josh?  You may want to focus on a few fringe "people" but actually I was referring to the group of people who distrust centralization which is a much larger group than you give credit.   

P.S.  Hint, this group is not all "rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts" as you like to characterize them.

Ok, so how would the Bitcoin Foundation "going after" BFL do anything for these people you are referring to?

I don't want them to just "go after" anyone, that is irresponsible.   But there have been some very very valid concerns about some of the claims and and business tactics by Butterfly Labs Inc.  The community, not just the rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts have tried over and over to have you address respectfully and intelligently that in my opinion have not been addressed. 

Josh, you specifically have seemed to go out of your way to make that the most difficult and painful process coming from BFL's head of PR which in the manner you have held yourself, makes you having that title a mockery of all real professional public relations experts, but I digress on that point. 

And what would these "very very valid concerns" be that haven't already been addressed elsewhere?  Please keep in mind, that what you might consider a "very very valid concern" isn't really a "very very valid concern" as the general world/business world understands it.  Asking for proprietary and/or non-public information would be an example of this.  You may *really* *really* want to know that information, but it's not normal or reasonable to ask for it and that's why it hasn't been provided.  Just because you *really* *really* want to know something doesn't make it "very very valid." 

I look forward to your answer.

[Dalkore]

That's NOT their mandate. You have to inform yourself, and take responsibility for your decisions. If BFL have wronged you in some way feel free to join the people currently planning a lawsuit against BFL...

Actually preventing serious black-eyes that harm the adoption of Bitcoin is or should be part of their mandate.  Actually if they DID do something it would lend them a ton of credibility with a core group that has been slow to embrace the foundation.  

Yeah, I'm sure a core group of rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts with personality disorders are real high on their priority list.  You do realize that the "core" group you're referring to are looked at as nutjobs by everyone but themselves, right?

Which conspiracies are you talking about Josh?  You may want to focus on a few fringe "people" but actually I was referring to the group of people who distrust centralization which is a much larger group than you give credit.  

P.S.  Hint, this group is not all "rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts" as you like to characterize them.

Ok, so how would the Bitcoin Foundation "going after" BFL do anything for these people you are referring to?

I don't want them to just "go after" anyone, that is irresponsible.   But there have been some very very valid concerns about some of the claims and and business tactics by Butterfly Labs Inc.  The community, not just the rabid, psychotic, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts have tried over and over to have you address respectfully and intelligently that in my opinion have not been addressed.  

Josh, you specifically have seemed to go out of your way to make that the most difficult and painful process coming from BFL's head of PR which in the manner you have held yourself, makes you having that title a mockery of all real professional public relations experts, but I digress on that point.  

And what would these "very very valid concerns" be that haven't already been addressed elsewhere?  Please keep in mind, that what you might consider a "very very valid concern" isn't really a "very very valid concern" as the general world/business world understands it.  Asking for proprietary and/or non-public information would be an example of this.  You may *really* *really* want to know that information, but it's not normal or reasonable to ask for it and that's why it hasn't been provided.  Just because you *really* *really* want to know something doesn't make it "very very valid."  

I look forward to your answer.

You really think it has anything to do with people wanting to know non-public information?

1.  Mis-leading statements & advertising on delivery schedule
2.  Mis-leading statements on performance claims initially
3.  Disrespectful Customer service primarily by you (Josh)
4.  Whole-fully inadequate customer service responses that basically were intentionally misleading to cover for issue #2 mentioned above.

Try directly responding only to these issues without addressing me or giving excuses on why.  I am only listing these because you asked me directly and I owe you that much.   You are the company so it doesn't matter what people do or say, proper business means holding yourself to a higher standard.  

Note:  If I came across as directly advocating BCF to do this action, it should not be taken there because I have no business relationship with BFL so I was not directly affected by these claims that have been brought up many times by many miners.   What I was addressing that if BCF did take this issue on, it would give them creditability for addressing an issue that rightly or wrongly is a big issue with a large amount of miners.  If anything, they would be doing you a favor by opening a dialogue with BFL and allow you to address and make amends to issues which I DO believe are valid.  I am just not advocating that BCF do that, by I am giving the observation that it would help them with a core group of users.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Not only should the Bitcoin foundation not do this, they couldn't if they wanted.  There is a concept of standing in legal matters.  The Bitcoin foundation has suffered no damages, it has no standing to file suit.  Period.  It would be instantly throw out of court on motion and would make the Foundation a laughing stock in the legal community.

[Inaba]

You really think it has anything to do with people wanting to know non-public information?

Of course it does, that's what the vast majority of the "questions" center around.

1.  Mis-leading statements & advertising on delivery schedule

There are no intentionally misleading statements or advertising.  Statements and advertising were given as what was believed to be true at the time.  If you can't see that, it's impossible to continue this line of discussion and serves as a direct example as to why it's impossible to hold a rational conversation with people on this forum.  The fact that you (apparently) honestly believe that this was some sort of scam from it's inception, with a complicated, methodical and intricate plot to dissemination misinformation and advertising is why no rational answer will satisfy.

2.  Mis-leading statements on performance claims initially

See #1 above.  If you honestly believe we knew our power usage was going to be something other than what we said it was, it serves as yet another example of why it's impossible to hold a rational conversation.  You already have it in your mind that there was wrongdoing and that things were the way you want them to be, as opposed to what they really were.

3.  Disrespectful Customer service primarily by you (Josh)

Ok, lets address this.  I seriously doubt I can get a rational response out of you with regards to this, but I will try to hold a rational conversation, but first I need one thing from you, because this one thing will illustrate my further dialog.

Please provide an example of disrespectful customer service that I have initiated.  I ask this of you because I only respond disrespectfully to people who approach in a disrespectful, rude, offensive or otherwise unacceptable manner.  I do not initiate hostile dialog, merely respond to it.  This point was lost long ago on most people, because they are inherently irrational in their hatred of BFL.  If you begin a dialog by lying, posting false information, writing in an exceptionally rude manner, etc... you can expect the same in return, as I have no respect or use for you.  On the other hand, as so (sadly) few people have found out, when you approach the situation with common courtesy, rationality and respect, you get the same in return.

Now, before you provide "evidence" of one of the typical troll crew asking "polite" information, please take into account past actions.  Once you have a history of trolling and being a general ass hat, it doesn't matter how you continue down the line, you are already completely useless to the conversation and no amount of concern-trolling will repair that situation.  With that in mind, please provide examples of where someone approached the dialog in a polite, respectful manner from the get-go and got a vitriolic, disrespectful response.  Bear in mind, I'm not saying it hasn't happened on the rare occasion (though I can't think of any, honestly), but those instances, if they even exist are so few and far between that they don't really apply in this context that you are referring to (That of a systemic, unilateral response paradigm from me).

4.  Whole-fully inadequate customer service responses that basically were intentionally misleading to cover for issue #2 mentioned above.

This seems like part of the above, which has already been addressed.  Again, what you consider inadequate usually means it is some sort of information you *really* *really* want to know but aren't *really* entitled to.

Note:  If I came across as directly advocating BCF to do this action, it should not be taken there because I have no business relationship with BFL so I was not directly affected by these claims that have been brought up many times by many miners.   What I was addressing that if BCF did take this issue on, it would give them creditability for addressing an issue that rightly or wrongly is a big issue with a large amount of miners.  If anything, they would be doing you a favor by opening a dialogue with BFL and allow you to address and make amends to issues which I DO believe are valid.  I am just not advocating that BCF do that, by I am giving the observation that it would help them with a core group of users.

Again, how would this "core group of users" you are referring to be helped if BCF "went after" BFL?  You still haven't answered this question.

[Syke]

blah blah blah without saying anything of substance blah blah blah

When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?

Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.

Where is the Japapeno test report Josh?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

You really think it has anything to do with people wanting to know non-public information?

Of course it does, that's what the vast majority of the "questions" center around.

1.  Mis-leading statements & advertising on delivery schedule

There are no intentionally misleading statements or advertising.  Statements and advertising were given as what was believed to be true at the time.  If you can't see that, it's impossible to continue this line of discussion and serves as a direct example as to why it's impossible to hold a rational conversation with people on this forum.  The fact that you (apparently) honestly believe that this was some sort of scam from it's inception, with a complicated, methodical and intricate plot to dissemination misinformation and advertising is why no rational answer will satisfy.

2.  Mis-leading statements on performance claims initially

See #1 above.  If you honestly believe we knew our power usage was going to be something other than what we said it was, it serves as yet another example of why it's impossible to hold a rational conversation.  You already have it in your mind that there was wrongdoing and that things were the way you want them to be, as opposed to what they really were.

3.  Disrespectful Customer service primarily by you (Josh)

Ok, lets address this.  I seriously doubt I can get a rational response out of you with regards to this, but I will try to hold a rational conversation, but first I need one thing from you, because this one thing will illustrate my further dialog.

Please provide an example of disrespectful customer service that I have initiated.  I ask this of you because I only respond disrespectfully to people who approach in a disrespectful, rude, offensive or otherwise unacceptable manner.  I do not initiate hostile dialog, merely respond to it.  This point was lost long ago on most people, because they are inherently irrational in their hatred of BFL.  If you begin a dialog by lying, posting false information, writing in an exceptionally rude manner, etc... you can expect the same in return, as I have no respect or use for you.  On the other hand, as so (sadly) few people have found out, when you approach the situation with common courtesy, rationality and respect, you get the same in return.

Now, before you provide "evidence" of one of the typical troll crew asking "polite" information, please take into account past actions.  Once you have a history of trolling and being a general ass hat, it doesn't matter how you continue down the line, you are already completely useless to the conversation and no amount of concern-trolling will repair that situation.  With that in mind, please provide examples of where someone approached the dialog in a polite, respectful manner from the get-go and got a vitriolic, disrespectful response.  Bear in mind, I'm not saying it hasn't happened on the rare occasion (though I can't think of any, honestly), but those instances, if they even exist are so few and far between that they don't really apply in this context that you are referring to (That of a systemic, unilateral response paradigm from me).

4.  Whole-fully inadequate customer service responses that basically were intentionally misleading to cover for issue #2 mentioned above.

This seems like part of the above, which has already been addressed.  Again, what you consider inadequate usually means it is some sort of information you *really* *really* want to know but aren't *really* entitled to.

Note:  If I came across as directly advocating BCF to do this action, it should not be taken there because I have no business relationship with BFL so I was not directly affected by these claims that have been brought up many times by many miners.   What I was addressing that if BCF did take this issue on, it would give them creditability for addressing an issue that rightly or wrongly is a big issue with a large amount of miners.  If anything, they would be doing you a favor by opening a dialogue with BFL and allow you to address and make amends to issues which I DO believe are valid.  I am just not advocating that BCF do that, by I am giving the observation that it would help them with a core group of users.

Again, how would this "core group of users" you are referring to be helped if BCF "went after" BFL?  You still haven't answered this question.

Allow me, all, to address the clown pertaining to the 15pt bold red text above.

Over 6 hours ago, a customer of BFL posted on its forum the following: https://forums.butterflylabs.com/monarch-discussion/4533-so-bfl-who-first-batch-monarch.html#post54429

So, BFL, who is in the first batch for the Monarch

The other companies point when a batch is sold out so that noone could buy a product that is actually ... sold out. But you no. Why? I transferred my 2 singles to 2 monarchs on 18.08 in the morning. Because you launched the pre-orders on Saturday and you didn't accept Paypal and I actually need your product to make such amount of btc to pay for your product but I still don't have neither of your products ( it sounds like catch 22...) I couldn't pay with BTC. And because you announced it on the early week-end no bank wire was possible (at least in Europe). Even the online bank transfers start on Monday. So I made the payment on Monday. You received the money 2-3 day later, my status is changed to processing and I have an order date of 18.08.

So my humble question is - am I in the first batch? I accepted the Agreement between you and me and I accepted "finally", "irreversible", without no refund and without possible future cancellation (the cancel option was added later) to transfer my money to the monarch. I think that almost 3000$ is enough for an earnest. I paid the rest of the sum on the first possible day - 19.08 - Monday. There was no other possible faster way to pay. So can I believe that I am in the first batch? Because it would look surrealistic if you say that the whole batch is sold out on the first day...

The guy was kind enough to support BFL with his ~$5,000 investment/order, and in return all he wants is an answer to a relatively simple question. But, somehow you feel it more important to come here, a community you're on record to loathe, ignoring the very customer base that has so kindly afforded 45, and counting, employees at BF Labs Inc.

You even have the gull to come here and chastise the very people on the forum BFL supports with its advertising dollars/bitcoins.

Here's a suggestion for you, one of which 99% of the business people here wouldn't even need to be reminded of: Go back to your forum and address every issue that your loyal customers who've sent their hard earned money to BFL have, then when you're done, come back here and playyyy with us for a while.

Each time I see you in a thread, I will now remind you of the above, among other things.

GAME ON!

[Bicknellski]

Yes it would be a great for the Foundation to have some hand in this but I would suggest that "members" of the foundation or people in the community agree to a set of ethical standards and agree to uphold them. Should BFL or Avalon break ranks with those standards then maybe the foundation could put them on a list of sorts for people to avoid them. Self-regulation should be the goal. Perhaps those mining hardware developers and diy groups could form a Bitcoin Mining Hardware Foundation and do just that. Obviously BFL and Avalon would not qualify at this point given their failures.

Either develop an independent body that the community funds to do this or an association of hardware makers world wide to promote ethical practices. I would be willing to work with other companies and DIY groups to do just that. Having worked on developing a professional association for teachers and school in Montessori in Indonesia we have seen great progress already on promotion and improvement of teachers, school and general knowledge of Montessori in a short time. That can be done in Bitcoin / Crypto community as well.

We really should focus on the positive players in the bitcoin economy. Seems like there is an overemphasis on those who have failed the community so far, currently there are plenty of viable and ethical contributors and that is where we need to put our efforts. Maybe Josh and Phin can start a new thread to discuss BFL's shortcomings or maybe I can about set up another thread. Maybe it is just easier if we discuss it here.

[Bicknellski]

Not only should the Bitcoin foundation not do this, they couldn't if they wanted.  There is a concept of standing in legal matters.  The Bitcoin foundation has suffered no damages, it has no standing to file suit.  Period.  It would be instantly throw out of court on motion and would make the Foundation a laughing stock in the legal community.

Agree wholeheartedly with this... maybe you want to work with me and start work on something that promotes positive and ethical Bitcoin business?

[shitaifan2013]

well people,

we have the bitcoin foundation, Why are they ignoring the BFL business practices ?

discuss.

lol, trying to fuck people over with a lawsuit @scamdoo?