This needs everyone's eyes on it - Bitcointalk please check this github issue!

[ABISprotocol]

Here's the issue - this needs a lot of eyes on it:

https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/issues/10

It relates to how Bitcoin issues will be managed in the future including sort of a battle for equal rights in the bitcoin foundation sphere!

Check it out, if you're not a github user sign up, if you are, weigh in.

Thank you! and share!

Cheers

[1715359607]

1715359607

[1715359607]

1715359607

[1715359607]

1715359607

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Free bump for more eyes to see.

[BurtW]

What a false thread alarm.  I expected to read about something really important but it is just another thread about the idiot Bitcoin Foundation.

[nwfella]

Gotta say this lifetime membership for founding members and additional voting rights suggestion is not a good sign.  If founding members feel they should have more voting rights than "normal members" one can't help but question their long-term motives.

*Absolute power corrupts absolutely!

[beetcoin]

i feel like the foundation is just lining up the players to make a run at some sort of power grab.. because as of now, what influence do they really have?

[Ron~Popeil]

What a false thread alarm.  I expected to read about something really important but it is just another thread about the idiot Bitcoin Foundation.

QFT. So much fud on this forum right now. Good news coming in waves and we seem to be doing all we can to scare people away.

[waldox]

bitcoin foundation is a liability
they are centralized org trying to control a decentralized bitcoin
they can be a way for governments to influence/control bitcoin thru code changes as bitcoin foundation is financially supporting a few core devs

[Parazyd]

bitcoin foundation is a liability
they are centralized org trying to control a decentralized bitcoin
they can be a way for governments to influence/control bitcoin thru code changes as bitcoin foundation is financially supporting a few core devs

It's the miners who vote for changes, not the foundation.

[Nicolas Dorier]

I wonder what they "decide".

As long as they don't coerce the bitcoin developers, we are good. (By coercion I mean legal, illegal, financially or not)
But I think bitcoin developers are not stupid, and know they don't need them to live, the community would help them if in financial distress because of the foundation. (I would)

But if they are coerced and miners don't agree, this would be a big injury for Bitcoin.

In my mind the foundation control nothing and is just seen as "someone to talk with" by governments, which is great since bitcoin can't go mainstream without govs approval.

[ABISprotocol]

Free bump for more eyes to see.

Thank you. I think this is an important issue, please add your thoughts on the github issue if you haven't already.  To me this really seems like not just a Foundation but a pivotal issue that has to do with how the Bitcoin community addresses how we all think of and treat each other, imho, a fight for equality reminiscent of civil rights ('1 person, 1 vote,' 'people, not corporations,') in #bitcoin sphere: https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/issues/10

Thanks for the bump and I look forward to seeing many more users' thoughts here and hopefully in github as well, which is where the issue and pull requests (everything that changes the text of bylaws, or code, or... etc.) happens.

[ABISprotocol]

bitcoin foundation is a liability
they are centralized org trying to control a decentralized bitcoin
they can be a way for governments to influence/control bitcoin thru code changes as bitcoin foundation is financially supporting a few core devs

It's the miners who vote for changes, not the foundation.

I understand that miners do, this has to do with equality of users' voice.  Do we wish to embed in repositories classes of persons based merely upon how much they make? I think that people's voices (I hesitate to use the word vote, because I think in decentralized frameworks, we are beginning to move toward transcending the older systems involving voting and representation) must be equal in these processes.  To the extent they are not, they must be made more equal. 
But since the decentralized systems require participation, and the number of active nodes that allow Bitcoin to function are decreasing(!), note that I referenced in this same open issue here (on the issue of equality, no special priveleges for certain members, etc, and so on)
https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/issues/10
that I embedded (or referenced is the proper term) within that issue, another open issue, relating to decentralized participation.  You can see how I did that by viewing the link at the bottom of my comment here:
https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/issues/10#issuecomment-45282288

And the open issue in the bitcoin repository itself, which was linked to there, can be found here (I am the author of the issue on enhancing decentralized participation in the bitcoin repository):
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/4079

Obviously with that direct connection to bitcoin itself, this has not only to do with the Foundation but with the code as shown in the repository of bitcoin/bitcoin, and with our understanding of what decentralized participation means in this context.  As you can see from the open issue referenced as #4079, this addresses not so much what one can do in the context of mining, but how any individual, regardless of whether or not they are mining, can receive incentives from running a full node (Bitcoin Core) to support the network and/or support the system they appreciate through various and manifold ways of decentralized participation.

I believe this is a profoundly significant time in which many users should participate on github.  Please spread the word!

[ljudotina]

At first, i was like: "Meh, it's Fundation related...screw them!"
Than after second tought, they DO control Bitcoin in certain way. They need to be as straight and opened as it gets....

[ABISprotocol]

At first, i was like: "Meh, it's Fundation related...screw them!"
Than after second tought, they DO control Bitcoin in certain way. They need to be as straight and opened as it gets....

I am an individual member of the Foundation (with a membership expiring in January that I do not plan to renew), but I contribute directly to a repository of the Bitcoin Foundation Education Committee, and I am also a contributor in the sense that I comment, have open issue(s) in the bitcoin repository itself, and have my own bitcoin project, http://abis.io - It's unfortunate but sometimes there are developed notions of classes or groups that are granted more priveleges than others and I don't see that as appropriate, it is inconsistent to me with decentralization, with the path that decentralization leads us toward equality, and given people's distaste for censorship I think there is that concern as well (if there are certain people that have 'more rights' merely because they are a special group).  There are developers and people who have been in the Foundation for a while who have commented on this issue, but I think more people need to be heard on github who have not yet been heard and who are neither developers nor Foundation folk.  Thank you if you do go there and comment because people need to be heard. 

[Beliathon]

Foundation lifetime member here, this does not alarm me one bit. Take a deep breath.