Bitcoin 100: Developed Specifically for Non-Profits

[gnar1ta$]

FANTASTIC!!!  Thanks to the two recent 10 BTC donations we are now (exactly) 80% of the way to our first 100 BTC pool!

Don't forget the amount commited but not yet sent...I think we may be there already    Looking at it again, we may be well past 100 BTC.

[BTCurious]

The general discussion is still fine, but with respect to the internet archive, we should not send the bitcoin100 there, because they have already received >฿200 from independent donations of users!

[brandondayton]

I'd like to make a pledge, but I'd like the charity selection process to be more worked out before I do. Maybe there should be a separate thread just for discussing the best way to select a charity.

I'd prefer a charity that focused on extreme poverty issues, such as vaccination, infant mortality and education. I like the idea of forwarding the cause of Bitcoin, but I want to make sure I'm doing something worthwhile with my money at the same time.

FWIW. I like these:

https://secure.unicefusa.org/site/Donation2?idb=979619930&df_id=1700&1700.donation=form1
http://www.rotary.org/en/EndPolio/Pages/ridefault.aspx
http://www.givedirectly.org/

[CoinLab]

http://blockexplorer.com/address/17gN64BPHtxi4mEM3qWrxdwhieUvRq8R2r
According to Blockexplorer at the time of this post, 252BTC has been donated so far.  (USD value ~$806)

This means we are about 60BTC away from donating $1000 worth of bitcoin!

I propose we set raising $1000 by the end of the week as a goal.

First, because Internet Archive is a great non-profit.

Second, because $1000 sounds like a lot more than $900.  

I think if we can show that we can raise over $1000 in a week, this story becomes newsworthy.  If we can get news articles written about the Bitcoin100 (and Bitcoin charitable giving in general), many charities will see what we have accomplished and think about setting up their own bitcoin address.

I am sending another 3.XXBTC now, cleaning out my mobile phone wallet.  

Lets break $1000!

[teukon]

I would agree, but I think people's idea of deemed worthy is drastically different and I hope it does not become too much of an issue here.  The way I look at it is my pledge of 1BTC is a minimum donation, more to Bitcoin than the charities themselves, as there are a few charities mentioned that I would not donate to outside of Bitcoin100.  The charities that I like more will get more from me separately. Like archive.org, which I sent 1 to already and will send more if/when they add a button directly to their donation page.

I certainly understand the sentiment and would love to do the same.  I expect I'd have no problem with pretty much all organisations that would be considered for support.  I would however refuse to donate to organisations such as Monsanto or the RIAA and for this reason alone simply cannot say "I pledge 1 BTC to any charity/organisation which adds a Bitcoin donation option".

Generally, I won't be upset if Bitcoin100 money ends up going to causes I wouldn't usually donate to.  As you noted, such pledged money is much more like a donation to Bitcoin itself.  If a cause comes along that I really do want to donate to (TOR, Free software foundation, archive.org) then I will make a serious donation on top.

I would be dismayed if the Bitcoin100 didn't manage to get 100 new charities to accept Bitcoin.  It would be a great shame for us to only get through 5 or 6 charities before fizzling out due to there being too much caution.  Just my thought though.

[CoinLab]

I would however refuse to donate to organisations such as Monsanto or the RIAA and for this reason alone simply cannot say "I pledge 1 BTC to any charity/organisation which adds a Bitcoin donation option".

Neither Monsanto nor the RIAA are non-profit organizations.

[RandyFolds]

Wow...I have been packing/moving the past couple weeks and totally missed this. I just sent four btc...toss it in where ever. I will happily contribute more once I have access to a stocked wallet. My shit is in boxes all over the place...

e: whoops, fucked up and had too many open block-explorers...looks like I donated 4btc to archive.org. Oh well...I suppose it's a thanks for all the Grateful Dead shows I have downloaded over the years. I'll hit the proper address once I find some flash drives!

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Time for a little housecleaning. Sorry for being a tad long, but a lot had to be addressed. Enjoy the read.

I'll throw 1 into the pot now and pledge 1 more for at least 10 charities.

Thank you, spetroel, for your pledge and the honoring of 1 BTC to the current wallet. The supporter's list in the OP has been update reflecting your kind contribution.

Then maybe we should do some of the work? Can someone please whip up a "Donate in Bitcoin" orange/brown rounded button similar to paypal for them to use? It will be a convenience for other charities going forward, too.

I'm curious as to if this is being worked on. I think we need to move to up to top priority. It should be a well thought-out design, one that would stand the test of time.

so how do I donate??  Do I just send to the charity's btc address?

Welcome to the club, stick_theman. I've read that you received the answer to your question. My apologies for not being present to help answer it.

Thank you for supporting Bitcoin100 with your kind pledge. You're #83

If they added bitcoin donations without having first been contacted by the bitcoin100, cool, people can donate bitcoins. But the bitcoin100 money should not be sent, is should be reserved to be offered to organizations to encourage the to add bitcoin doantions. Perhaps on the bitcoin donation website you can add a page linking to places that accept bitcoin donations, and thus people who want to contribute can? Also you would link to all the organizations that added bitcoin donations because of our efforts, that way people can go back and contribute again to them later.

What is the situation you think should qualify a non-profit for the Bitcoin100? (Sorry, I am not sure what you mean because you have some typos).

My take on this is that we shouldn't use Bitcoin100 in situations like this. They didn't add the link because of us.

What is 'us'? I was under the impression that this was a diffuse gathering of donors, without the need for a central authority.  Because at least two Bitcoin100 members (Obsi and I) contributed to them adding the link. I think that is besides the point though, shouldn't we be encouraging all charities to accept bitcoin, regardless of whether someone from this forum has contacted them?  I don't think we need to bring pride into our charitable donations.

View this thread for chronology: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53986.20
1. They posted to their blog, asking for donations
2. Several commenters ask if they can donate bitcoin/where to send it.
3. Obsi emails june@archive.org to ask for BTC address, gets reply posts it
4. I emailed june, asking for her to post her BTC address on the donate page to be sure that it was Internet Archive's (Obsi probably replied similarly)
5. She put a link on the donate page to a BTC address in their FAQ.

I agree:
-It is not the best placement
-It is not as emotionally charged as donations to feed the needy

But, this is the first non-profit organization to accept bitcoin!  [size=103pt]This is a big deal![/size]

Internet Archive provides a great service to the digital community.  CoinLab already donated 10BTC.  Come on guys, let's at least bring the total up to 100. (it's at 65 at time of this post, 35 to go!)

This is a big deal! Wait till other charitable organizations see archive.org's donation amount over at blockexplorer.

Sent 1 from 14jsWFGUSFAHJbWfww3a5BpawQAwGU1aqZ

Thank you kindly, RaggedMonk, for honoring your pledge. The list has been update in the OP.

Nice thread Bruno!
I'm one of those people who like to scrutinize each charity for specific properties. Mainly in my case..  strict secularity.
I'll be throwing what I can at some of these as they come on board.

Would it be practical to keep the list of charities that are newly bitcoin-accepting updated in the original post? (preferably with the date they started accepting)

How did you know my name was Bruno?  

Since you've stated that you'll be contributing to few charities in the future, I took the liberty in adding you to the pledge list and showing a +2 next to your name. The +2 means that you are pledging more than 2 from my understanding of your post. I'm sure you're correct me if I'm in error. Thank you kindly, julz, for your kind pledge.

Your suggestion of having an ongoing list of charities will be posted in the OP, as well as on the website, which is in the works. I'm designing (or is it building--whatever) it now, thanks to edd kindly procuring the domain name--bitcoin100.org.

I don't think the Bitcoin100 should be a free hand-out.  The two natural criteria seem to be:

1) The cause asking for funds is generally deemed worthy (most charities).
2) They add Bitcoin100 as an alternative donation method.

In this case, archive.org narrowly miss satisfying condition (2) due to the layout of their donations page.

I've purposely refrained from addressing the archive.org issue in the post, for it's going to be rather long as it is. I did start another thread, which includes a poll, for users to discuss the archive.org issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54414.0

Would it be practical to keep the list of charities that are newly bitcoin-accepting updated in the original post? (preferably with the date they started accepting)

This is a great idea.  It would be good to also include a link to the page on their site which displays their BTC address.

In the works, RaggedMonk. Thank you for adding your input on this issue.

I don't think the Bitcoin100 should be a free hand-out.  The two natural criteria seem to be:

1) The cause asking for funds is generally deemed worthy (most charities).
2) They add Bitcoin100 as an alternative donation method.

In this case, archive.org narrowly miss satisfying condition (2) due to the layout of their donations page.

I would agree, but I think people's idea of deemed worthy is drastically different and I hope it does not become too much of an issue here.  The way I look at it is my pledge of 1BTC is a minimum donation, more to Bitcoin than the charities themselves, as there are a few charities mentioned that I would not donate to outside of Bitcoin100.  The charities that I like more will get more from me separately. Like archive.org, which I sent 1 to already and will send more if/when they add a button directly to their donation page.

+1

I just sent a BTC to the vanity bitcoin address: 1BTC1oo1J3MEt5SFj74ZBcF2Mk97Aah4ac

Lucky you! You get mentioned twice in one post. This proves you got your question answered correctly. Thank you again, stick_theman.

Sent 10 of my 50 BTC pledge. (d842b178cc31bf55418e211214988f96977471e72f60c1dff8c87acbb0402110)

I also thought of the DOSBox pledge when I read the OP. The communication was somewhat disappointing at the time.

What do you mean?

I guess I was expecting a more enthusiastic response.

Since somebody already posted 'FANTASTIC!!!', I'll go with Happy Happy Joy Joy.

But I do feel a need to explain that you didn't have to pledge 10 BTC to this wallet. Remember, it currently isn't allocated towards any particular charitable organization. You're more than welcome to dole out 1 BTC at a time and only after reviewing where the wallet is tentatively heading. I offer up this explanation, not only to you, but everyone reading this, so that there's no misunderstanding.

That said, as you have possible read, your donation is highly appreciated. The list in the OP has been updated reflecting your very kind contribution. Thanks, again.

FANTASTIC!!!  Thanks to the two recent 10 BTC donations we are now (exactly) 80% of the way to our first 100 BTC pool!

Boy, do I have a nice surprise towards the end of this post.

FANTASTIC!!!  Thanks to the two recent 10 BTC donations we are now (exactly) 80% of the way to our first 100 BTC pool!

Don't forget the amount commited but not yet sent...I think we may be there already    Looking at it again, we may be well past 100 BTC.

I don't think we can add the non committing pledgers to that 100 BTC. Remember, when a user pledges, say 1 BTC, they're stating with that pledge that sometime in the future they will honor that pledge to a charity of their choosing. That is all. And, it's based on the honor system. Sure, somebody may pledge and not honor their pledge, but I believe that will rarely happen.

I'd like to make a pledge, but I'd like the charity selection process to be more worked out before I do. Maybe there should be a separate thread just for discussing the best way to select a charity.

I'd prefer a charity that focused on extreme poverty issues, such as vaccination, infant mortality and education. I like the idea of forwarding the cause of Bitcoin, but I want to make sure I'm doing something worthwhile with my money at the same time.

FWIW. I like these:

https://secure.unicefusa.org/site/Donation2?idb=979619930&df_id=1700&1700.donation=form1
http://www.rotary.org/en/EndPolio/Pages/ridefault.aspx
http://www.givedirectly.org/

No problem, brandondayton, but don't confuse the word 'pledge' with 'donating' for they're two different things. Normally, I would take the liberty of adding you to list as a pledger, but since I'm unclear as to your intention, I'll opt to wait to having you formally pledge. All you would have to say is "I'm in" and I'll put you down as a supporter. From there, it's up to you when, and how much, you honor your pledge. I hope that makes sense. Thank you kindly for the support, nonetheless.

A charity selection process will be made available in the very near future. Your suggestions will be added to the list located in the OP.

I would agree, but I think people's idea of deemed worthy is drastically different and I hope it does not become too much of an issue here.  The way I look at it is my pledge of 1BTC is a minimum donation, more to Bitcoin than the charities themselves, as there are a few charities mentioned that I would not donate to outside of Bitcoin100.  The charities that I like more will get more from me separately. Like archive.org, which I sent 1 to already and will send more if/when they add a button directly to their donation page.

I certainly understand the sentiment and would love to do the same.  I expect I'd have no problem with pretty much all organisations that would be considered for support.  I would however refuse to donate to organisations such as Monsanto or the RIAA and for this reason alone simply cannot say "I pledge 1 BTC to any charity/organisation which adds a Bitcoin donation option".

Generally, I won't be upset if Bitcoin100 money ends up going to causes I wouldn't usually donate to.  As you noted, such pledged money is much more like a donation to Bitcoin itself.  If a cause comes along that I really do want to donate to (TOR, Free software foundation, archive.org) then I will make a serious donation on top.

I would be dismayed if the Bitcoin100 didn't manage to get 100 new charities to accept Bitcoin.  It would be a great shame for us to only get through 5 or 6 charities before fizzling out due to there being too much caution.  Just my thought though.

+1

Nice post!

Wow...I have been packing/moving the past couple weeks and totally missed this. I just sent four btc...toss it in where ever. I will happily contribute more once I have access to a stocked wallet. My shit is in boxes all over the place...

e: whoops, fucked up and had too many open block-explorers...looks like I donated 4btc to archive.org. Oh well...I suppose it's a thanks for all the Grateful Dead shows I have downloaded over the years. I'll hit the proper address once I find some flash drives!

You know what, RandyFolds? You sure can mess up a good post I have going here. I can't figure out how to update the list on the OP with this post you just wrote. I did put you in at #87 showing that you are pledging 5+ BTC. That much I gleaned from your post. But can you tell us how the hell you downloaded Grateful Dead Shows from archive.org? Am I missing something here? Is there a 1967 Napster site I'm not aware of? And why did you move? And how did you move? We've all seen your avatar. Some day, somebody's going to photoshop that image and put lipstick on that...

Thank you kindly, RandyFolds, for supporting Bitcoin100. You're a great guy. NOW FIND THOSE FLASH DRIVES!

~~~~~~~~~

I want to now thank Darin Stanchfield with simplecoin.com for his pledge and kindly honoring 10 BTC, to date. Moreover, I have matched his first donation--10 BTC, of which you should be able to see now, for I did it prior to the start of penning this post an hour ago.

That concludes today's housecleaning. The wallet balance is currently 91 BTC. Thanks to every one who have donated thus far. AWESOME!

~Bruno~

[freequant]

I would however refuse to donate to organisations such as Monsanto or the RIAA and for this reason alone simply cannot say "I pledge 1 BTC to any charity/organisation which adds a Bitcoin donation option".

Neither Monsanto nor the RIAA are non-profit organizations.

Quite the opposite actually

[Phinnaeus Gage]

So far, the vote is exactly even in regards to the first wallet being allocated to archive.org: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54414.0

I believe further discussion is warranted? Kindly state your opinion in regards to this issue over at that thread, linked above.

EDIT: Via a PM, jake262144 has honored 1 BTC toward the current wallet. Thank you, Jake, for honoring part of our pledge. The list in the OP has been updated reflecting that kind contribution.

~Bruno~

[BTCurious]

Regardless of the outcome of the archive.org vote, I feel we can use them as an example of the potential of a bitcoin donation option. Something akin to
"One of the first organizations to accept bitcoin as a donation option, received 250 bitcoins in the first week, and X more in the month after. If you would accept bitcoin donations, our pool pledges to send at least 100 bitcoin in the first week, which is equivalent to X dollars.

To receive donations in bitcoin, a wallet needs to be set up -etc etc explanation or some link or w/e-. We prepared a handy button which instantly shows people you accept bitcoin."

[teukon]

I would however refuse to donate to organisations such as Monsanto or the RIAA and for this reason alone simply cannot say "I pledge 1 BTC to any charity/organisation which adds a Bitcoin donation option".

Neither Monsanto nor the RIAA are non-profit organizations.

Quite the opposite actually

True that.  I was just giving extreme examples.  Basically, I'm happy for my pledged bitcoins to go practically anyway as a promotion of Bitcoin itself but even with a quantifier of "charitable organisation" or "non-profit organisation" I simply cannot say that "I will donate to anyone".

What I can do is send 99 BTC (I've sent 1 already) to the Bitcoin100 with the understanding that they (Phinnaeus Gage and/or those he appoints) will give me 3 days notice by e-mail of any organisation they want to fund so I have a short window to veto for my funds if necessary.  I'll probably get back a positive response quickly enough but if I don't respond to the e-mail within 3 days then the funds can be used as needed.  This would provide some liquidity which would help Bitcoin100 support charitable organisations with short notice.

PM me if you're interested Phinnaeus.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Regardless of the outcome of the archive.org vote, I feel we can use them as an example of the potential of a bitcoin donation option. Something akin to
"One of the first organizations to accept bitcoin as a donation option, received 250 bitcoins in the first week, and X more in the month after. If you would accept bitcoin donations, our pool pledges to send at least 100 bitcoin in the first week, which is equivalent to X dollars.

To receive donations in bitcoin, a wallet needs to be set up -etc etc explanation or some link or w/e-. We prepared a handy button which instantly shows people you accept bitcoin."

One of the first? I guess that's relative.

[Technomage]

I suggest we restart the poll regarding using our first wallet to fund archive.org. I originally voted no, but they actually changed the location of the donation link, probably in part thanks to my own efforts as well. I was one of the people who contacted them yesterday about this. I would now support spending the first wallet to archive.org.

[teukon]

I suggest we restart the poll regarding using our first wallet to fund archive.org. I originally voted no, but they actually changed the location of the donation link, probably in part thanks to my own efforts as well. I was one of the people who contacted them yesterday about this. I would now support spending the first wallet to archive.org.

As would I, but I'd prefer such donation to take place after Bitcoin100 has contacted archive.org with this offer and archive.org has replied positively and with a request for this support.

What is the general sentiment among the Bitcoin100 for supporting organisations that establish a Bitcoin donation independently of this project and manage to raise quite a bit regardless?

[BitcoinPorn]

As would I, but I'd prefer such donation to take place after Bitcoin100 has contacted archive.org with this offer and archive.org has replied positively and with a request for this support.

I thought the whole role of this Bitcoin100 was to promote Bitcoin, not the 'Bitcoin100'     They seem to be supporting Bitcoin, what more requirement is there for them to have.

When will a decision be final on this?  As I think waiting might hurt the impact of having a bunch of Bitcoin donations made to them right after they put up this type of donation system.

[Technomage]

I'm really not sure what to think of this. Ideally we should only use the wallets when we ask an organization to add Bitcoin as a donation method but I think we can make exceptions. It's just one wallet out of many to come. This does not mean we should splash around with the money, I've been adamant about this before. But archive.org happens to be a major site and they have shown great support for Bitcoin and many of us who are part of the Bitcoin100, have been supporting them separately already.

So in conclusion I'm quite okay with any decision but it's also important to remember that there are added benefits for this. Archive.org has already raised quite a nice sum of bitcoins, but this is not an incentive to not donate more, on the contrary. The more we get and the faster we do it, the better it is for publicity value. We can show everyone that there is a good amount of money in the Bitcoin economy and it is worth it to add it as a donation method.

Whatever we do, we should restart the poll ASAP and get a decision today.

[Rassah]

I agree with BitcoinPorn that the main purpose of Bitcoin100 is to promote Bitcoin by giving charities incentive to accept it, not to simply donate to charities. Archive.org put up a Bitcoin donation address, and received numerous donations in return. I believe that our Bitcoin100 funds are limited (note how many were only able to pledge 1), and should not be spent casually, and that donating them to archive.org will not serve their intended purpose. As far as i know, these funds have not been promised to anyone yet, and I suspect archive.org's acceptance of Bitcoin will not be influenced by any decision Bitcoin100 makes.
That said, I will abstain from any actual voting, and will send the funds wherever I am asked to.

[BurtW]

Sorry for the cross post but it appears not everyone is reading both threads:

In an ideal world here is what I would like to see:

Button [Donate through JustGive.org] we only get 95.5%
Button [Donate through PayPal] we only get 95% (or whatever the real number is)
Button [Donate using Bitcoins] we get 100% of your donation!
OR Donate using Bitcoins to 17gN64BPHtxi4mEM3qWrxdwhieUvRq8R2r and we get 100% of your donation!

Having said that, I vote we now give them the 100 BTC and here is why.  My initial concern (that the Bitcoin donation was way down at the bottom where no one could see it) has been addressed.  They now have Bitcoins mentioned right there next to PayPal - what else could we ask for?  Anyone who actually has BTC to donate can now easily get their address.

What we want is publicity, right.  What better thing to be able to splash, tweet, etc. than "Archive.org got 445.04892494 Bitcoins, worth over $1300, in less than a week after simply adding Bitcoin to their donation options"

We can do this by adding our 100 to the 345.04892494 they already have.  So already having 345.04892494 donated only amplifies the effect of our 100 BTC - it does not diminish it.

We are all in this for the long haul and we have 99 more charities to go, right?

Finally, at the end of the day we are talking about just $312 $320 $319 here...

Let's get this one done and start on the next one.

[gnar1ta$]

Anyone look through the wallets in the link Meni posted?  Archive.org is doing much better than most all of them - without the extra 100.  But I'm with Rassah on this, just tell me where to send my 1BTC and when to send it again.