Topic: A bitcoin user group that is open and expresses the will of the community (Read 4053 times)

Sounds like a good idea but I wouldn't suggest making it in the USA. Would be great if there was another bitcoin group centered in south america, europe, etc that dealt mainly with spreading bitcoins to those regions.

I really like the press center. I'd like if we could develop some form of feature request/ feedback system for future improvements or to report bugs. Yet it is sufficient in its current form for its purpose.

Franky,

1) There is a filter on the left for language, country and timezone. They are cumulative filters so you can narrow down to exactly the right person even if there are thousands. So if you want a Finnish speaking, bitcoin miner with development experience who lives in Poland, you can find exactly that.

2) I would welcome any help to spread the word and add materials. I'm planning on breaking out the "citations" into a separate section where all bitcoin mentions and articles can be submitted and rated.

just viewed http://bitcoinpresscenter.org/ and also heard it on the podcast on lets-talk-bitcoin and this is what i call an open platform to allow anyone who has confidence to talk to the press to submit themselves as contacts, showing what type of contact with media you prefer EG interview, live interview, written etc.

great work to whoever is involved in setting up this better option for bitcoin press

this is a good thing

now all that is required:
1)add an additional feature for location as well as language because to get some local confidence in bitcoin and not have the U.S domination

2)to google search bitcoin news stories, find the editors email addresses and link them to the service

Making great progress aantonop

the primary issue of the existing press center on bitcoin.org was that because it was embedded in a site with other content and multiple conflicts of interest, there was a perceived need to control access and preserve some sense of "moderation". That was misguided and ended up causing a crisis of leadership, an uproar from the community and a running battle on github pull requests.

After a long and protracted argument, which admittedly got heated on all sides (I am not too proud about some of the things I said or the way I said them), it appears that the press center will be removed from bitcoin.org. It was too political to b housed in such a prominent community site.

What I am offering is to do the work (in the next week) to produce a site that has no other purpose than to be a neutral and inclusive press center, geared towards functionality and offering a powerful tool for the world press. My experience in press relations has guided me to add many features currently missing from the press center, simple things that journalists need. For example:

- Filters for language spoken
- Multiple resolution pictures and a press-kit for each representative
- A standard attribution blurb, short and long bio
etc.

I will be putting together the platform and then inviting people to fill it as inclusively as possible with press contacts. The process for nomination is TBD, but it will err towards inclusion and will not have any veto wielding powers.

This solves the main problem that led to the call for a user group. Though that negates the need to do the user group right now, I still plan on doing it at a slower and less urgent pace. In the mean time, I am liberating the press center and giving the control to the community at large.

Another thing happened today: Sirius who is the actual owner of the domain dropped in after the week long debate and said he thought the concerns were valid and the press center should not live in bitcoin.org. That probably settles the issue. In a power game, the big kahuna just spoke.

More to come soon.

If Matt wants to call me a tool for donating my time and money to help people learn about bitcoin for free, then that's his prerogative. I just dislike his publication will not help us broadcast to the bitcoin community our project and its goals.



Simple, he is a leader and a CEO with resources. When someone who is proactive sees something unjust, he does something about it. We'll have a better more beautiful and inclusive press center in a few days.

explanation?

After a break-through on the press center issue, I will be distracted for a few days because I am FORKING the press center.

bitcoinpresscenter.org will be the inclusive press center that does not live on bitcoin.org. More info to follow, site up by Monday

any place where multiple voices come together and try having an opinion will always have others that object. so instead of having closed communities, or voting systems that have a tiered approach of 1, is the topic even worthy of voting for 2. then voting for it. i find it alot better to just provide all the advice and assistance there is without limits and allow individuals/groups to then grab whats important to them, what bit would help them out most and then they use it within their region/ group or project.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list of businesses that accept bitcoin. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

so if i was to say lets make a mega list anyone thats not afraid of getting on camera that wants to be a media contact. id hope a few people (no master controlling powers involved) got together and made a full business listing.

easiest way to do it is to have a subforum here called the 'community suggestions' where the replies will be the solutions to the topic requests

I agree with you about! Do you remember the first alt coins and BTCExpress/LukeJr.? I left, couldn't stand it. I would ask a question on certain IRC channels and get pissy/no replies because everybody had stakes in the game. Turf wars over nothing. MikeH&MikeG/Gavin/Hal were not always available to bounce ideas off of. TVM and PAL technologies are tough curves for a Flash programmer. oof!
The amount of trolling is getting exponential.
We need a place for educating newbs/alt-devs/afficianados of every ilk so the pressure is removed off the forums. I watched Matthew N Wright chase a new forum member around for 4-5 days calling him Atlas,?!? ... really? Ignore buttons don't change the fact of ignorant.
How do you keep the hardware/mining/pools forum so clean? I know humor and tough skin help but newbies can't tell who is serious and who is not. I would not invite my enemies to these forums because of the way any/all topics get smeared with equal/magnanimous shit. I just want a forum/user group where "here is where you get x information" not buffalo crap and bananas.

*edit forgot an h!

I'm actually genuinely trying to understand the reasons behind this and why it's needed on top of the existing methods of communication.


I'm not sure this would be any different in a user group - the same people who participate in bitcointalk will participate in this user group - there was a reason why the devs (almost completely) left bitcointalk for irc and git and mailing lists - and there was a reason why they moved the forums from *.bitcoin.org domain name...

I wish this group the best of luck, I agree with several of the other people here that probably the best approach is to come up with some ground rules (e.g. the number of votes to set forth a motion, voting procedures, things like that) then set up some kind of forum (could be based on bitcointalk.org - I'm sure theymos would set up a subgroup if you ask nicely).  I don't think trying to come to a consensus on how a consensus should be arrived at will work

Regarding helping people - I actually find it far more rewarding to help people posting in /r/bitcoin than here - since people actually seem grateful of information rather than trying to turn every single thread into a flamewar/argument.

Will

I suspect you're going to need to show a bit more leadership at least initially.

Whilst canvassing ideas and suggestions is a great start, there'll need to come a time for solid action in a direction that might not appease all camps.

You'll unlikely be able to build a working organisation on consensus alone.

So, is this a conversation or just goading? I fail to see where holding your breath for a reply, or nee-ner, nee-ner is bringing the community closer to discussion of a User Group?

Andreas, you have my attention and I'll help out anyway I can.
Local exposure here in the Maritimes, nationally here in Canada, quizzing, educating, meetings, whatever.

WillPhase, you have a great forum here to supply all knowledge concerning hardware/mining/pools and such.
Any devs needing help for anything other than altcoin, good luck with that.
I want User Groups, and I want it soon. Not a troll-pile sent by other devs to derp,derp the hell out of threads that have nothing to do with them or their projects.
Find a thread on bitcointalk.org that has not been overrun with FUD, only exists on the hardware/mining/pools section. Because you would not put up with that if someone went all out, misdirection lying herp derp on your frequent hangouts. You cleaned out your deadwood, we do not have that option because the nature of education and development.

How about asking theymos for a subforum? 

I'm all for us pooling our ideas and resources.

wait, isnt this what bitcointalk.org is for?

I asked first

I think you'll find that there is a *lot* of discussion on the bitcoin irc channel(s), on the git pull request(s), and a bit on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, all of which are open and anyone can participate in.  Once again - I'd be interested if you could point out a situation where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

Yes, that's what the initial rules propose. I had a 1% of membership approval threshold for putting a resolution to vote, but the number is just a placeholder. In fact, I can see a better way would be a dynamic system where the "difficulty" of passing a resolution adjusts to keep the number of votes at a manageable level. Kinda like the hashing difficulty.


Actually, code is the one thing this community will NOT have authority over. That's the only area the core developers DO have authority. This community would have less authority, less expertise and no need to be involved in core code. Leave that to the devs.

This is more about advocacy, education, world-press relations, local chapters, newbie support, local business support etc.


Do you have examples of where the community was consulted on an issue in anything more than a "let's pretend we haven't made the decision already" manner?

I see a lot of ad-hoc projects that are very interesting and useful. Then I see a few organized and centralized entities which have a lot of power and no accountability. I see nothing in between

I think a common approach to this problem is to have a method by which proposals can be put forward, support can be measured for the proposals, a threshold above which proposals are put to a public ballot, and then a threshold of participation/voting needed to pass a motion.  Then with the backing of this many people and the records of the debate, an way forward can be agreed (e.g. someone do coding, someone approach the press, someone make a new website)

The way that bitcoin has developed over the past few years has been very much based around - if you have an idea then code up a git pull request, show that it provides benefit and then it will eventually get adopted into the code.  This works if the people coming up with the ideas also have the ability to code them.  Of course, I presume the purpose of the user group would be to do more than just git pull requests to the bitcoin source - are you talking about also advocacy for legal standing/regulation.

Do you have an example of where the 'will of the community' is being ignored?

Will

You might also want to consider talking to the meetup groups. They are the closest thing we have to local chapters.


First, every vote needs to be directly tied to exactly one person. I like the hash system I proposed, but we could implement something different. Second, we need to find a way to keep debates both focused and highly specific. This is very difficult on the internet in my experience. Perhaps there could be a reward system for reaching consensus or some form of gamification?