A bitcoin user group that is open and expresses the will of the community - page 4.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: aantonop on April 29, 2013, 05:47:56 AM

I don't think funding is the problem. If it is well structured, then "thousands" is entirely possible. Anyway, I'm sure there will be donations separate from the members fees. I've never had trouble raising money. That is not a big problem for this community.

Accountability... now that's a problem. Getting people to spend on a worthy cause and a representative transparent organization? Not so much.

I'll donate the first $1000 the moment we hit 100 members, that's a pledge.

Thousands of users eventually but initially it might take a year before you have enough members to incorporate. I'm just thinking that not being setup might discourage users from participating (i.e. those that will wait till everything's set up).

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: Dabs on April 29, 2013, 05:45:56 AM

Switzerland? Openly declared neutral country, with strict bank secrecy laws. Obviously, we won't store funds as fiat. But the org itself. Or, check out the pirate bay. Where is it? Sweden?

The Pirate Bay were also prosecuted and convicted. Not sure if you knew that.

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Quote from: justusranvier on April 29, 2013, 05:34:54 AM

This could be a problem as far as financing the setup of the group is concerned? You'd need thousands of users to join in order to have the funds to incorporate in a foreign country?

I don't think funding is the problem. If it is well structured, then "thousands" is entirely possible. Anyway, I'm sure there will be donations separate from the members fees. I've never had trouble raising money. That is not a big problem for this community.

Accountability... now that's a problem. Getting people to spend on a worthy cause and a representative transparent organization? Not so much.

I'll donate the first $1000 the moment we hit 100 members, that's a pledge.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: aantonop on April 29, 2013, 05:43:53 AM

Just familiar with 501(c)(3) non-profit laws in the US.

I'd love to hear alternatives, especially if they offer better protections for non-profits, better privacy laws etc.

Perhaps New Zealand? Australia? Sweden? Germany?

The problem with alternatives is you then have to spend a lot of time and effort looking up details in those jurisdictions.

At least in the US you're familiar with those laws and better understand the nuances.

For a non-profit organisation local laws should have far less of an impact.

It's not like you'll be issuing shares or protecting IP.

Dabs

legendary

Activity: 3416

Merit: 1912

The Concierge of Crypto

Switzerland? Openly declared neutral country, with strict bank secrecy laws. Obviously, we won't store funds as fiat. But the org itself. Or, check out the pirate bay. Where is it? Sweden?

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Just familiar with 501(c)(3) non-profit laws in the US.

I'd love to hear alternatives, especially if they offer better protections for non-profits, better privacy laws etc.

Perhaps New Zealand? Australia? Sweden? Germany?

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: Raoul Duke on April 29, 2013, 05:36:08 AM

why in the US? Wouldn't it be better to diversify?

Probably because OP is from the US and most familiar with the US legal system.

He's happy to accept alternative suggestions though.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: justusranvier on April 29, 2013, 05:34:54 AM

I have a strong reluctance to donate to organizations to "represent me". It's too open-ended. I'd much rather donate to specific goals, and what's missing right now is someone to organize and coordinate crowdfunding efforts.

I think you need some structure in place in order to achieve the secondary goals you're talking about. Already you recognise that you need an organisation to coordinate crowd-funding efforts. This could be a duty of the Bitcoin organisation.

Raoul Duke

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1002

why in the US? Wouldn't it be better to diversify?

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

I have a strong reluctance to donate to organizations to "represent me". It's too open-ended. I'd much rather donate to specific goals, and what's missing right now is someone to organize and coordinate crowdfunding efforts.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: aantonop on April 29, 2013, 05:25:36 AM

I just checked and you are right. I miscalculated.

How is $1 per year (0.01 BTC)?

Reasonable?

Let's say $1 per member per year. No lifetime membership - have to pay each year to keep current. Oh, obviously there are no corporate memberships. People only.

This could be a problem as far as financing the setup of the group is concerned? You'd need thousands of users to join in order to have the funds to incorporate in a foreign country?

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Quote from: bg002h on April 29, 2013, 05:14:08 AM

That's a big donation. The Bitcoin foundation fee is considerably less.

I just checked and you are right. I miscalculated.

How is $1 per year (0.01 BTC)?

Reasonable?

Let's say $1 per member per year. No lifetime membership - have to pay each year to keep current. Oh, obviously there are no corporate memberships. People only.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: bg002h on April 29, 2013, 05:14:08 AM

That's a big donation. The Bitcoin foundation fee is considerably less.

Hmm... I didn't have a problem with the size of donation to begin with but now that you mention it, it could be very exclusionary to a large population of the community.

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Quote from: btcmind on April 29, 2013, 05:10:34 AM

Interesting. As soon as you have money and voting, you have laws which apply. For instance you are referring to US law, and I don't believe in US law to say the least. (I think the US is becoming a lawless country in many ways). Why should BTC be US-based? Laws or enforcement without courts don't have much meaning.

Please suggest alternative venues for incorporation.

Perhaps a country that is both neutral and has stronger non-profit and privacy laws?

Somewhere in Scandinavia? New Zealand? Australia?

I'm open to all suggestions - Please don't tell me what is wrong, I'm sure I got a lot wrong on my first draft!

Tell me how to do it RIGHT in your opinion.

There's no reason for me to set the rules. That goes against the whole point of this.

Help me crowdsource the rules for a broad-based representative association that can promote the common interest (bitcoin) via the expression of the members through resolutions, discussions and voting.

Thank you!

bg002h

donator

Activity: 1466

Merit: 1048

I outlived my lifetime membership:)

That's a big donation. The Bitcoin foundation fee is considerably less.

btcmind

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Interesting. As soon as you have money and voting, you have laws which apply. For instance you are referring to US law, and I don't believe in US law to say the least. (I think the US is becoming a lawless country in many ways). Why should BTC be US-based? Laws without enforcement / courts don't have much meaning. If there is something wrong with BTC, another currency / protocol will emerge. For instance Ripple is created by an organization and we will see how that works out.

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Can someone suggest a trusted member of this community who can act as escrow for user membership fees until we reach a 100 launch size?

The policy would be to hold all the funds until we reach 100 members, then hand control to the board under control of the bylaws of a 501(c)(3) or to an independent trustee running a trust account.

If in 90 days we cannot get 100 members, all of the existing fees are returned to the same bitcoin address they originated (or a refund address offered at signup), minus tx fees.

I want the money to be separate and publicly accounted from the beginning and certainly not under my control.

Suggestions? I've seen some postings by a guy called John K(?) who does escrow, perhaps he might be trusted enough?

I'll fund any escrow and maintenance costs from my own pocket until it's up and running

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

This sounds like a good idea even if bitcoin.org weren't having transparency issues.

It could be said that this is a 'fork' of one of the management groups.

Diversity is important and hopefully, ultimately, a plurality of organisations will serve the community better than one.

aantonop

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 116

Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.

Quote from: Chet on April 29, 2013, 02:35:13 AM

Well 1 vote per person - how do you enforce that?
What keeps me from creating sock puppets?
Why would I donate to something with no clue how my money might get used?

Because I suggest a process to decide all funding decisions openly and with votes from all members.

I'm open to suggestions on how to avoid sockpuppets. The obvious solution would be members have to tie to identities, at least once for verification. We can discard the records once verified. We can use an independent company to do the identity verification without giving us details. We can even outsource the membership management and vote management to an independent third party.

I am proposing a 501(c)(3) or equivalent, with US registration, named directors and open accounts. Add to that independent yearly audits of the books.

I'm open to more and better approached to develop transparency and accountability.

PS. I am recusing myself from the board. I will pay by 1 bitcoin (or less) and get voting membership. Then we can all elect a board we trust, though they will not be able to spend the money without a member vote.

In the US it is relatively simple to create a trust account under an independent executor, who follows rules set out in the bylaws.

Chet

full member

Activity: 121

Merit: 100

Well 1 vote per person - how do you enforce that?
What keeps me from creating sock puppets?
Why would I donate to something with no clue how my money might get used?

Topic: A bitcoin user group that is open and expresses the will of the community - page 4. (Read 4117 times)