I've only read the last few posts here so not sure if anyone has suggested this.
I can see you're doing some vanity addresses. I was thinking perhaps something like
1Jan100xxxxx
1Feb100xxxxx
Then we could target January as the first round February as the second etc. A bit like bitlotto with a different address each month.
Only issue is no 0's or O's allowed. Only o's. I still don't now if Phinnaeus will be able to get a charity, let alone one a month.
he will, let's hope for the best
@Phinnaeus you're right about my earlier proposal, too hard to understand atm, i was trying to suggest that having more than one person in charge with the funds could be better for everyone, i know holding some important funds could be a burden for one individual too. Now we could really use those multisig scripts that are being implemented in the client.
How about doing it in a new way... ?
We know that one of us, Gavin or you Phinnaeus will have to be present and talk to their representative in person, i personally don't trust on-line chats for this kind of stuff. Then explain what bitcoin is in a few words and the fact that lots of people are willing to donate bitcoins right away for their cause. Set them up with a wallet and take note of the first address in a moment
From that instant we could have 24h time span to donate a minimum of 100btc to their address.
This way we can have total transparency monitoring the address with blockexplorer and if our courageous representative is willing to record the whole thing so we could see it on youtube or use twitter. Too much to ask i know.
Remember bitcoin is a new concept, why not take advantage of all it's features.
he will, let's hope for the best
Hence the creation of
Bitcoin100--hedging a bet for charitable organizations into becoming more receptive to implementing a Bitcoin donation option on their respective websites. There should be no reason for them, or others, to look upon this gesture as a bribe. No one suffers if they decline yet, fundamentally, all parties gain if accepted.
@Phinnaeus you're right about my earlier proposal, too hard to understand atm, i was trying to suggest that having more than one person in charge with the funds could be better for everyone, i know holding some important funds could be a burden for one individual too. Now we could really use those multisig scripts that are being implemented in the client.
I believe that this issue is solved, or will soon be, once the vanity address is hashed.
We know that one of us, Gavin or you Phinnaeus will have to be present and talk to their representative in person, i personally don't trust on-line chats for this kind of stuff.
There'll come a time and place for either or both approaches--on-line chat and in-person meeting, sometimes both working in concert with each other. Depending upon all the variables would dictate who would have the pleasure of speaking face-to-face with the charitable organization's representative.
Then explain what bitcoin is in a few words and the fact that lots of people are willing to donate bitcoins right away for their cause. Set them up with a wallet and take note of the first address in a moment
A given. On the same page here.
From that instant we could have 24h time span to donate a minimum of 100btc to their address.
The hope here is to not have a waiting period. Once the nod is given, fire up the androids.
This way we can have total transparency monitoring the address with blockexplorer and if our courageous representative is willing to record the whole thing so we could see it on youtube or use twitter. Too much to ask i know.
Total transparency is not a problem with this endeavor. I don't trust YouTube, for this is what happened last time I was on there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4OzXjOKi9QI'll be maintaining a Twitter and Google+ account soon after I break in my new coffee table.
Bruno