Peter Todd (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1150
|
 |
September 27, 2013, 09:39:08 PM
Last edit: September 27, 2013, 10:38:28 PM by retep |
|
tl;dr: The following language was added to the bylaws to make it clear that the the Bitcoin Foundation supports a decentralized and free Bitcoin: Section 2.2 The Corporation shall promote and protect both the decentralized, distributed and private nature of the Bitcoin distributed-digital currency and transaction system as well as individual choice, participation and financial privacy when using such systems. The Corporation shall further require that any distributed-digital currency falling within the ambit of the Corporation's purpose be decentralized, distributed and private and that it support individual choice, participation and financial privacy.
- https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/commit/ac2b734659d6f0fe250ca29337a5739e9f10e742I think the final language chosen is a good compromise between John Dillon's original pull request, which in hindsight was probably too specific even if I thought its intent was good, and not having this section at all. Kudo's to Patrick Murck for suggesting it - I spoke to Patrick at the May conference and I found him to be reasonable and thoughtful. The discussion that lead to the acceptance of the pull request is worth reading: https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/pull/4It'll never be easy to agree on specific actions, but agreeing that a decentralized and free Bitcoin is a fundamental goal that all foundation members should share is a great starting point. Reddit post: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1n9wgp/the_bitcoin_foundation_has_finally_officially/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to achieve higher forum ranks, you need both activity points and merit points.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
September 27, 2013, 11:31:16 PM |
|
congratulations.
|
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2348
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
September 27, 2013, 11:44:41 PM |
|
Excellent and a fine sentiment too, it is almost impossible to get the wording exactly correct but having these words in place is a good start.
Particularly pleased with the financial privacy and distributed network aspects, these make the technology unique in today's world of currencies and payment systems with compromised and perverted functions, so codifying it into a statement will be an enduring point of difference.
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1276
|
|
September 28, 2013, 01:06:00 AM |
|
That's a positive and a favorable thing in my mind, but I am by this time pretty deeply into the 'Bitcoin Foundation is a loser' frame of mind. More so than when I was mildly negative about the idea of it's formation several years ago, and this in part because ~vess who led the thing is very possibly a straight-up crook...I can't help but notice that when he is involved in something like Bitcoinica or Coinlabs a lot of money seems to go missing.
One way or another, the bylaws are just words on a piece of paper, and the concepts are so ambiguous that there is an almost infinite amount of wiggle-room even if someone wanted to bother trying to pretend to adhere to them. When the rubber meets the road I doubt that this text is much more than a marketing ploy. We'll see.
|
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
Peter Todd (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1150
|
|
September 29, 2013, 04:01:21 AM |
|
One way or another, the bylaws are just words on a piece of paper, and the concepts are so ambiguous that there is an almost infinite amount of wiggle-room even if someone wanted to bother trying to pretend to adhere to them. When the rubber meets the road I doubt that this text is much more than a marketing ploy. We'll see.
I commented on the role and value of bylaws in the pull request: Bylaws aren't magic, but they help you say, if needed, "The Bitcoin Foundation hasn't done x, y, and z, yet they are all things they should be doing and could be doing." with the result of either forcing the foundation to change, or removing the monetary and developer support through community outcry. It will result in some messy situations because it's hard to determine if an idea is being rejected due to subversion or because technically it doesn't work, (zerocoin) but it's the best we can do at the legal level, and does keep the legal and political activities of the foundation pointed in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
markjamrobin
|
|
September 29, 2013, 04:12:02 AM |
|
One way or another, the bylaws are just words on a piece of paper, and the concepts are so ambiguous that there is an almost infinite amount of wiggle-room even if someone wanted to bother trying to pretend to adhere to them. When the rubber meets the road I doubt that this text is much more than a marketing ploy. We'll see.
I commented on the role and value of bylaws in the pull request: Bylaws aren't magic, but they help you say, if needed, "The Bitcoin Foundation hasn't done x, y, and z, yet they are all things they should be doing and could be doing." with the result of either forcing the foundation to change, or removing the monetary and developer support through community outcry. It will result in some messy situations because it's hard to determine if an idea is being rejected due to subversion or because technically it doesn't work, (zerocoin) but it's the best we can do at the legal level, and does keep the legal and political activities of the foundation pointed in the right direction.
It isn't in any way a rule, but a statement that they support decentralization. |
|
|
|
b!z
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1010
|
|
September 29, 2013, 05:03:43 AM |
|
I think it is good that they are working to improve decentralization. Centralization is not good sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Todd (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1150
|
|
September 29, 2013, 06:13:15 AM |
|
It isn't in any way a rule, but a statement that they support decentralization.
Section 2.2 is within ARTICLE II - PURPOSES and is as much a rule as Section 2.1: "More specifically, the purposes of the Corporation include, but are not limited to, promotion, protection, and standardization of distributed-digital currency and transactions systems including the Bitcoin system as well as similar and related technologies." If anything given the "include, but are not limited to" language in 2.1 the text in Section 2.2 restricts the Bitcoin Foundation's activities more than anything else in the bylaws. If the foundation, say, decided to promote a new Bitcoin-QT release that included a PPCoin-style central blockchain checkpoint system it would be very easy to argue that they were violating their own bylaws by doing so; you could even sue the Foundation for doing that if you were a member. (but IANAL) |
|
|
|
|
markjamrobin
|
|
September 29, 2013, 01:16:39 PM |
|
It isn't in any way a rule, but a statement that they support decentralization.
Section 2.2 is within ARTICLE II - PURPOSES and is as much a rule as Section 2.1: "More specifically, the purposes of the Corporation include, but are not limited to, promotion, protection, and standardization of distributed-digital currency and transactions systems including the Bitcoin system as well as similar and related technologies." If anything given the "include, but are not limited to" language in 2.1 the text in Section 2.2 restricts the Bitcoin Foundation's activities more than anything else in the bylaws. If the foundation, say, decided to promote a new Bitcoin-QT release that included a PPCoin-style central blockchain checkpoint system it would be very easy to argue that they were violating their own bylaws by doing so; you could even sue the Foundation for doing that if you were a member. (but IANAL) It is a rule to the foundation, but it cannot be enforced over other community members. |
|
|
|
|
