Can we discuss an alternative entity to the bitcoin foundation?

[cdog]

I believe that the alternative is called Litecoin.

[phelix]

What about something like a delegated direct democracy?

Also I suggested a Bitcointalk Community Senate here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334419 (though the discussion went a little ot) as a base rooted counter point.

[phelix]

What about something like a delegated direct democracy?

Also I suggested a Bitcointalk Community Senate here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334419 (though the discussion went a little ot) as a base rooted counter point.

I think this should be something not affiliated with the forum, that seems unprofessional to me.

You called for power to the community. This forum makes for a large part of the community.

For the sake of decentralization, I suggest several alternative entities.

This is bitcoin it should be something that is involved more in the eco-system.

Are you talking about the blockchain?

[xDan]

What about something like a delegated direct democracy?

Also I suggested a Bitcointalk Community Senate here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334419 (though the discussion went a little ot) as a base rooted counter point.

maybe it's less about "electing" people, and should be more about building a communications infrastructure. I guess bitcointalk is already that to an extent, what with all the threads expressing outrage etc.. But imagine "Anonymous" style campaigns, where some communications channel or something is created for a particular issue as and when the need arises.

What is the *purpose* of the original foundation? What aspects is it desirable to replace, or provide an alternative to? Answer that, otherwise it's just a foundation for the sake of it and being contrarian.

- funding developments / improvements?
- promoting bitcoin?

Both these things already happen on bitcointalk, with bounties, and with the various threads "let's get X to accept bitcoin, how do I explain Bitcoin to Y".

And if these two things are all a foundation would exist for, then the solution could be something as simple as a new forum with precisely two boards, one for promoting of projects that need funding, another for organising bitcoin marketing "campaigns". (Or perhaps implemented as a Reddit / Hacker News style voting system).

Maybe also a curated Q&A section where verified journalists can ask questions. (or just a heavily moderated Q&A forum where duplicates are removed and questions are heavily focussed on current events in Bitcoin land).

[jdbtracker]

excellent discussion.

so, we must think of this problem in the right context.

We are a highly decentralized group, with different backgrounds, nationalities, languages.

If we are to do this we must be fully decentralized within the world culturally and ideologically.
How do we create this?

How do we reach consensus on what we know, believe or trust?

How do we reach consensus on what we should do?

How do we interface with the legacy governing system?

As a decentralized group, knowing what we know is more difficult to gauge than anything, getting a % of who believes what is also difficult. We must do this efficiently and transparently indeed. The foundation of a Direct Democracy system must be that of openness, openness so profound that it would be considered the most Open project ever made.

And this can be done now using Bitmessage, this is what I propose.

We use Bitmessage to broadcast our beliefs and propositions, our polls and ideas. These statements would be broadcast to a public ledger with the hash of the post, which can be downloaded BitTorrent style to save people the hassle of downloading all the posts; Yes, a Blockchain.

people can be nodes for democracy downloading the whole Direct Democracy ledger, and allowing people to find the posts they want to find, or giving them web interfaces to the posts to be downloaded dynamically in a p2p fashion.
People can also simply download the posts they believe in, distribute those and erase posts you disagree with to prevent them from being distributed. The more people believe in a post the faster it will propagate.

All the posts would be categorized and linked to all relevant and related information, a web of categories and associations. Each post can be given a secondary hash that is simply the metadata for the categories given by the OP, they would be able to change what they want their posts to be categorized or associated with without affecting the hash of the original post.

Each person can sign their messages to guarantee the source of the post.

The more people have a particular hash to share the more likely it is what the community believes, knows, or is trying to figure out collectively, if it's spam or just plain bad... no one will keep it. the hashes always remain on the ledger, but not on peoples hard drives.

This would at least get us agreeing.