Signature campaigns must be TAXED for redistribution

[Free Market Capitalist]

With the ray of hope brought by victories such as that of the great leader Zohran Mamdani, it is high time that Bitcointalk took a step towards social justice. It is unfair that some privileged members of the forum, who've had some unfair advantage, earn so much and others so little or nothing. To address this, the most reasonable solution is to impose a fee system for signature campaigns and avatars that exist on the forum so that this money can be redistributed to the most disadvantaged forum members.

The system I propose is as follows: a minimum exemption of $20, on which no tax is paid. From $20 to $50, a 30% tax is paid. From $50 to $100, a 45% tax is paid. And anything in excess of $100 pays a 60% tax.

These are reasonable income tax brackets that resemble those of advanced countries with a high quality of life, such as Denmark.

I hope my left-wing friends on the forum will lead by example and enthusiastically support the idea.

Now, how about redistribution?

Some might consider establishing criteria to prevent abuse of the system, such as requiring recipients of redistributed income to have a minimum level of merit and/or activity.

But to those who think that, I say you are fascists. No human being is illegal. Therefore, the forum must remain open so that anyone can register and benefit from this redistribution.

I am also sure that my friends who support open borders policies will logically also support this great idea. The massive influx of new accounts to the forum can only be positive.

[Mahiyammahi]

But to those who think that, I say you are fascists. No human being is illegal. Therefore, the forum must remain open so that anyone can register and benefit from this redistribution.

Don't you think those who is already in forum and active on the forum, contributing on forum have enough merits and quality to join a signature campaign. Then why need this redistribution mechanism? If this happens forum will be only seen as a charity programe that will donate money to member's. Even signature campaigns are getting flooded by alts, merit abuser , this idea of your won't sustain.

But

If theymos feels that forum needs to get monetized, the way you're implying rather than cutting of user's pay it should be the projects advertisement. Although forum does have the membership option from where there can be a little revenue generate. But I won't mind if it needs for forum development 5% cut off ain't bad.

Those who is paying tax on crypto after 45% cut off they should still pay 15-30% tax varied by region. Idk how you get this crazy idea.

[Donneski]

Personally, I think this proposal completely misunderstands what Bitcoin and by extension, Bitcointalk truly stands for. The whole essence of Bitcoin is freedom from centralized control and coercion. So imposing a tax or redistribution policy on members’ campaign earnings would literally go against that very principle.

From what I know, people earn through signature campaigns because they’ve built trust, activity and reputation over time. That is not an unfair advantage like you said, it’s earned merit. Trying to redistribute it by force isn’t justice, it’s just a soft form of control.

If we actually want equality, I propose that it should come from equal opportunity, not equal outcome. Anyone here can work their way up, no one is locked out. Let’s keep this forum aligned with the decentralized ideals that Bitcoin itself promotes.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

Are you insinuating that those farming accounts should get paid for farming because the farmed accounts were not able to reach forum standards to get into a campaign? And what is the first essence of a tax system? Isn't it to mostly foot government duties that in turn makes life easy for the same citizens being taxed?

I thought this forum is decentralized and if we are being taxed then the forum should be renamed to altcoin talks obviously because it's not representing bitcoin in the first place. This is a forum for crying out loud not a country.

[Hatchy]

I don't see any good reason to implement this proposal.
It would be unfair to the active members who have worked hard to build their reputation and merit. If they are forced to pay a heavy tax on the money they earn from promoting signature campaigns, it punishes their effort.
For example, a 60% tax on a $100 payment leaves the member with only $40. This massive deduction would destroy the incentive to participate. Many high ranking members would simply stop promoting their signature space.

Literally this would significantly reduce the inflow of signature campaigns to the forum. The system would turn the forum into that of the government, taking a large share of members' hard earned money in the name of generating revenue.

[Ambatman]

A nice initiative but this is a forum about Bitcoin. Where everybody have the right on how to spend their funds.

Signature campaigns must be TAXED for redistribution

Must is a strong word.

Now won't say much but give reference to this link about donation https://bitcointalk.org/donate.html

we are able to operate comfortably using advertising and fee revenue along with our BTC reserves, we no longer collect donations. If you want to help the forum, please make good posts, report rule-breaking posts, and invite friends. If you want to donate BTC, donate it to a charity, or maybe even to your fellow forum members.

Imposing it as a must is a No in my opinion.
People can choose to do so voluntary. Let's not even talk about how it would be taken advantage of by alts.


Maybe I'm the one that isn't seeing the bigger picture.

[JeromeTash]

I thought this forum is decentralized and if we are being taxed then the forum should be renamed to altcoin talks obviously because it's not representing bitcoin in the first place. This is a forum for crying out loud not a country.

The forum is not decentralized, though. It has an admin that can decide to do whatever he wants, and there is nothing much any other member can do about it. Take an example of that bitcoin mixer ban.


The Taxing thingy is a very bad idea, or maybe it's just some sarcasm or Joke  This is just a forum, not some charity organization or Government arm. If anything, "taxes" would be imposed to help with the forum development or administration, not some "disadvantaged" members who chose top sign up even when they had the choice not to.

[Moreno233]

You are proposing that people pay tax for signature earnings to the forum, and at the same still pay to their country when the money land in their wallet do that participant of the signature end up with nothing? If you pay 30% to the forum and another 30% to your country, you will be left with 40%, is this worth the time and energy put in to meet the signature campaign requirement? This idea is not necessary because the forum still have enough money. This is a community that was created for Bitcoin and not primarily for profits, unless there are many things you are not telling us.

[Comeacross]

I'm surprised this idea is coming from a high rank member. I think the higher the rank, the more reasonable the post should be  

Haven't we passed the era of exploitation? This is purely exploitation! The system will even favor non signature participants than the actual participants.

Correct me if I am wrong please. So literally, the forum will automatically turn to money making platform where you just need to be a member to get paid?

Suppose the tax is mainly for the maintenance and improvement of the forum if the need be, that is a fair suggestion but tax for redistribution is totally off point in my opinion.

In every society earning is attribute to hard work, not emotion or pity. I see no reason why forum should be different, offer to reward for just being a member. Personal donations is always a welcome one, people who feel some persons are not benefiting enough from the forum can decide to make donations for them willingly and not through tax imposition.

The forum is fighting against alts but this suggestion is another way to reward alts.

[uchegod-21]

I am saying NO! to any forceful levy, where's the freedom we all talk about? This  is so unfair on many grounds. Everyone here in this forum has earned their rank, status and reputation in this forum by merit. If they are paid higher, they deserve it. Everyone should work hard, earn merits and enjoy the benefits others are enjoying. If anyone here feels that lower ranking members are not earning enough or not earning at all, they can voluntarily donate to these persons. Imposing a fee on members here and enforcing it goes against the principles of Bitcoin.

[EarnOnVictor]

I'm sure the OP doesn't mean this, he just wanted to know people's reaction to it.

Let it make sense to me, a user took his time and efforts to build a profile on a neutral forum, and he would be taxed, for what? Those new users, or the underprivileged users should also do better to rank up. To help them is not about taxing others, but to further create a better enabling condition/environment for them to rank up.

Does it even link up to be using a country's tax system on a forum like this? Has he even thought of an abuse where people continue to open and farm new and underprivileged accounts to receive the benefit?

Besides all that, the forum would tax you as high as the OP stated, and you will still pay PIT to your country. What would remain?  

[IceLincoln]

Hahahaha 😂😂😂…… this must be a joke coming from Poker player FMC. We complain for the taxes levied on us by the government and now we want to do same? How are we any better?… some of the words you used makes me not want to believe it.
There are a lot of things that could go wrong with this. How will you determine the under privileged users or most disadvantaged like you used.
 It just means newbies can just relax and get paid cause the more advanced ranks would be working for them. Once such a rule is established the influx of new accounts will be overwhelming if right now we’re complaining of alts. This just makes it easier for them, the goal will be get to the level of merits/activity of being recognised as a “most disadvantaged” and boom you’re settled.
It’s funny to think of it!

[Joy- maker]

See @Free Market Capitalist I get the angle you're coming from, but I don't really think or support that kind of system here on Bitcointalk. And The forum has always been set up in a way that you earn based on your contribution, activity and the trust you have built. See those people who earn more did not just get lucky, they have been in this forum for years, they stayed committed and consistent, and they have also built trust in the forum.

So If you start to tax or force campaign earnings to be redistributed, then most campaign managers and advertiser will probably just leave, which means in the end nobody will benefit. And if you open the door for anyone to sign up and instantly get a share will 100% attract spammers and alt account like crazy. And you don't want to even imagine how bad things will get when there's an easy way to abuse the system.

So IMO I think the better way is still to be encouraging people to learn, improve their posts and build their reputation. And when they have  build their names and value, you'll see that opportunities will just come naturally. Trying to force equality usually ends up breaking the whole system instead of balancing it.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

Honestly I get your point man, but don't you think it's better people fight for their place in signature campaigns and get it by their good contributions to the forum as evaluated by campaign managers. If you make provision for earning by those who are of rank and not privileged to be in signature campaign, it would be easier for guys to grow alts to a certain rank which makes them eligible to receive pay in the forum and to that effect ghost workers would be much in the forum.

Again most of us pay taxes in our different countries for crypto profits and it's a lot already and if we still pay taxes here in the forum that would be double taxation and would be very discouraging to participants of signature campaigns. In sharp response there would be many alts trying to meet up to having something profitable after the double taxation and the quality of engagement here would even degenerate the more. If you place the taxes on the companies for their participants, they may loose interest in continuing since it would increase their budget against their plan.

To me this your idea would have more negative consequences than the positive you intended.

[JiiBs]

The system I propose is as follows: a minimum exemption of $20, on which no tax is paid. From $20 to $50, a 30% tax is paid. From $50 to $100, a 45% tax is paid. And anything in excess of $100 pays a 60% tax.

These are reasonable income tax brackets that resemble those of advanced countries with a high quality of life, such as Denmark.

My only course of wonder is what would the online quality of life be then,,,
Maybe the Epochtalk project would have more funding which it didn’t lack in the first place to come into play, lol…

And then should the taxation become too much, we would at least have something to complain about like the rest of the taxed world do and accuse its government. That would make for a true community you know, something to accuse the administrator Theymos, staff and DT users of.

[Amphenomenon]

With the ray of hope brought by victories such as that of the great leader Zohran Mamdani, it is high time that Bitcointalk took a step towards social justice. It is unfair that some privileged members of the forum, who've had some unfair advantage, earn so much and others so little or nothing. To address this, the most reasonable solution is to impose a fee system for signature campaigns and avatars that exist on the forum so that this money can be redistributed to the most disadvantaged forum members.

A good business for account farmers indeed

Now the good guys will feed the bad ones also just like every flaw system of the real world?
Is not like signature campaign is a compulsory/necessity for all. Not all top forum members are in campaign and some have never been in one and I think this is also true for some old low ranks members.

[Ultegra134]

You almost got me at first, I was like, what is he on about? There's no way he's being serious. The more I read, that I started understanding that this post is all sarcasm. Good one! Not only did the post make me laugh, but the serious replies were also hilarious. Although this post is not serious, it actually draws a parallel with signature campaigns and what's really happening out there. Although you raise simple and valid points, the majority of people of the "left" will never accept it nor even discuss it without yelling their BS.

[KingsDen]

Re: Signature campaigns must be TAXED for redistribution

You should have capitalized "MUST" instead of "Taxed";
theymos merited this post but dropped just 1 merit, now I have mixed feelings about that;
I love your idea, let me quickly make 5 accounts incase this idea would be implemented;
Now, how do I grow the 5 accounts, do I need to hire people?
Who knows theymos could decide to share Satoshi's bitcoin to all of us in this forum one day;
ThankGod I'm in this forum. Let Mixers return first before you start your redistribution.

[TryNinja]

Nice try

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Unfortunate, 1st April 2025 is about 5 months away, so why did you have to hurry @Free Market Capitalist? This would have been a very good prank for the day!
Since we are talking tax, how about the service that are advertising here, are they going to pay taxed as well just like our greedy governments do?