"Warning - while you were reading 193 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post."
LOL
For the record, I LOVE that the Foundation exists now. I think this is a huge positive step for Bitcoin. Few negatives, plenty of positives. I also understand the concern many people feel - we should always be diligent and skeptical of anyone trying to be "the face" of Bitcoin. But in this case specifically, and to the extent this Foundation can act in certain manners for certain goals, I think it's a very legitimate development and I'll be joining as a paying member here soon.
Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 37. (Read 127634 times)
is there any difference between the industry membership levels?
(I am not sure if other countries work like that too)
Neither does yours.
One thing the bitcoin foundation can do for us is to organize American bitcoiners to call their congresscritters when there's a really bad bill that could mean bad things for our community.
(I am not sure if other countries work like that too)
(I am not sure if other countries work like that too)
So we'll need girls. I nominate mousepotato. 
By electing not-geeks?
We need socialites to woo every congressmen!
(Seriously, it sucks that we have to play the lobbying game in order to keep our enemies at bay)
Lobby group...
Geeks don't know how to lobby. How can we ever defeat hollywood and Western Union?
By electing not-geeks?
Lobby group...
Geeks don't know how to lobby. How can we ever defeat hollywood and Western Union?
And... we will just create a new one.
There is already more than one, just like there is already more than one repository. 
Quote
(The Bitcoin Foundation) .... a registered non-profit based in DC ... .
Why DC?
I think there should be anonynous memberships. To avoid gaming of voting, perhaps anon members should have no voting rights?
This makes no sense. There is already "anonymous membership" and that is the donate page. Simply donate bitcoins, no name is asked. Being a member is about having voting rights, donating anonymously is about supporting it anonymously, with no voting rights. The current system works fine in my opinion, no changes are needed.
Very simple: Due to this simple restriction they have a preselection of people that do not mind the establishment of a factual central authority. People who care about privacy will not join - and these are generally the most libertarian and non-conformist ones.
I think there should be anonynous memberships. To avoid gaming of voting, perhaps anon members should have no voting rights?
Quote
(The Bitcoin Foundation) .... a registered non-profit based in DC ... .
Why DC?
Best vanity TLD I've ever seen.
I just made a terrible discovery.
The English Foundation.
This is a foundation dedicated to US English. I can't tell but I don't think they even invented English, they seem to be co-opting it for their purposes after the fact and I fear it will get worse. One main tactic seems to be teaching English to new people, eventually those people are going to outnumber us and (with help from The Foundation) have more influence than us early English adopters.
This is -our- language we are talking about here. I don't think it would be wise to leave it in the hands of this one organization.
The English Foundation.
This is a foundation dedicated to US English. I can't tell but I don't think they even invented English, they seem to be co-opting it for their purposes after the fact and I fear it will get worse. One main tactic seems to be teaching English to new people, eventually those people are going to outnumber us and (with help from The Foundation) have more influence than us early English adopters.
This is -our- language we are talking about here. I don't think it would be wise to leave it in the hands of this one organization.
The Gold Foundation
http://www.goldfoundation.com.au/
The Bitcoin Foundation could be an outreach people with for asperger's too ... lol?
Is there a published list of all board members and the businesses they are associated with? In the interest of transperancy it might be good for everyone to see what interests the people who claim to be the voice of bitcoin serve besides their interest in bitcoin.
You might be surprised....
If the TBF refuses to publish such a list, maybe we can create it ourselves with available info and some digging?
A watchdog organisation woud be a good thing. Bittyleaks
After reading most of the thread, I am still worried about this Foundation.
Particularly the fact that the main developer is part of the same construction in which politics and influential industry individuals will play a huge role. Conflicts of interest are inevitable to happen.
I do want to support Gavin and other active developers, but not through this organization.
Particularly the fact that the main developer is part of the same construction in which politics and influential industry individuals will play a huge role. Conflicts of interest are inevitable to happen.
I do want to support Gavin and other active developers, but not through this organization.
Is there a published list of all board members and the businesses they are associated with? In the interest of transperancy it might be good for everyone to see what interests the people who claim to be the voice of bitcoin serve besides their interest in bitcoin.
You might be surprised....
If the TBF refuses to publish such a list, maybe we can create it ourselves with available info and some digging?
Is there a published list of all board members and the businesses they are associated with? In the interest of transperancy it might be good for everyone to see what interests the people who claim to be the voice of bitcoin serve besides their interest in bitcoin.
You might be surprised....
One of the reasons I won't be joining is that I don't want to put my name on their list. But this is a part of any membership based organization. It's pretty hard to see how they could reliably have anonymous members without it being open to abuse. On the other hand (I haven't checked but) I doubt they actually take photo ID from members and it's likely you could supply any random name, address and email. Which brings us full circle. If you want member identity info then you need to check everything or else you may as well just have anonymous members. Certainly when dealing with Bitcoin that couldn't be more true.
For amount equal to 3 USD (price of 1 bottle of vodka) I can get a scan of passport of a real person. 25 BTC is enough to get 100 real identities. How real identity helps to protect "TBF" against sock puppets? They need real identities for something else. This is a RED FLAG for sane bitcoiners.
Jump to: