I wrote an article about the Foundation's need to clean up it's act and refocus it's efforts. Mark Karpeles is the second of two Foundation board members forced to resign for misbehavior in less than a month. To put this number in perspective, there are now only 5 board members remaining today.
Board member behaviors leading to these resignations give a black eye to the Foundation, the currency, and our community. It also cripples the Foundation’s role to enhance acceptance of Bitcoin, as stated in “Why We Need A Foundation,” (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/why):
“We see this foundation as critical for bringing legitimacy to the Bitcoin currency. Only then can we increase its adoption and positive impact on the world’s finance.”
If anything, the Foundation, through failing to properly select honest representatives and to act quickly when those representative’s actions became suspect, is guilty of the very reputation damage they seek to overcome.
If you're interested in reading more, go to http://bitjuice.com/2014/02/25/bitcoin-foundation-needs-to-refocus
Topic: Bitcoin foundation and Gox (Read 2001 times)
I just had another peep at the site, and I still can't see a statement about the peculiarities of the situation at Mt Gox, the missing 750,000 BTCs, Karpeles refusal to actually say anything and the effect all this has on the holders of BTC or cash at Mt Gox.
I am amazed at the cowardice and while I understand there are legal issues with saying too much, I can't fathom out why it is so silent.
This is its statement of intent on the website, which has been completely ignored during the biggest crisis the BTC community has faced:
As the Bitcoin economy has evolved, we have all noticed barriers to its widespread adoption—botnets that attempt to undermine the network, hackers that threaten wallets, and an undeserved reputation stirred by ignorance and inaccurate reporting.
To us, it became clear that something had to be done. We see this foundation as critical for bringing legitimacy to the Bitcoin currency. Only then can we increase its adoption and positive impact on the world’s finance.
[...]
We are determined to keep Bitcoin rooted in its core principles: non-political economy, openness and independence. While we aim to advance standards and security, we remain strong advocates of the liberating power of decentralized money. Our goal is to act as both an organizing body for Bitcoin and simultaneously be inclusive of the general Bitcoin community. Only then will our mission succeed.
What a waste of f***ing time!
I am amazed at the cowardice and while I understand there are legal issues with saying too much, I can't fathom out why it is so silent.
This is its statement of intent on the website, which has been completely ignored during the biggest crisis the BTC community has faced:
As the Bitcoin economy has evolved, we have all noticed barriers to its widespread adoption—botnets that attempt to undermine the network, hackers that threaten wallets, and an undeserved reputation stirred by ignorance and inaccurate reporting.
To us, it became clear that something had to be done. We see this foundation as critical for bringing legitimacy to the Bitcoin currency. Only then can we increase its adoption and positive impact on the world’s finance.
[...]
We are determined to keep Bitcoin rooted in its core principles: non-political economy, openness and independence. While we aim to advance standards and security, we remain strong advocates of the liberating power of decentralized money. Our goal is to act as both an organizing body for Bitcoin and simultaneously be inclusive of the general Bitcoin community. Only then will our mission succeed.
What a waste of f***ing time!
What would you have liked them to say/do?
Stop scamming people?To be clear I don't particularly see the need for them either, but people seem to have some really strange ideas.
What would you have liked them to say/do?
Dissolve?
Stop scamming people?
Perform a Mexican hat dance?
They did secure the resignation of MtGox, which is more than I expected they would be able to do.
No, they did not. If you eat an apple, do you say that the apple managed to get eaten? They responded to MtGox's resignation in the only way they could, so they are acted up on, not acting. The only way an apple can respond to an eater is, frankly, to accept be eaten.
Secure:
succeed in obtaining (something), especially with difficulty.
If it makes you feel better, feel free to read it as:
Quote
They did obtain the resignation of MtGox, which is more than I expected they would be able to do.
I expected them not to get it because of their constitutional problem with getting rid of a founder member.
How did the BTC Foundation secure Karpeles' resignation? This is the first I have heard of that "news"?
Karpeles resigned by his own volition as far as I know.
I did not mean to imply that it is a fact that they forced it out of him. I just meant "secure" as in "obtain". I am surprised he resigned. I wonder if they had to put any pressure on him behind the scenes.Karpeles resigned by his own volition as far as I know.
Edit: The petition link above did not come from foundation members, it was a petition to the foundation.
Yes, I never said otherwise. The first post in that thread makes that clear. That's not an official release, just a forum post by a member.
He is a member that sits on the Regulatory Affairs Committee. So he’s not really just an ordinary member. The same guy pops up there regularly and appears to consider himself close to Karpeles, simply calling him "Mark".
His last comment, made yesterday, claimed "Mark is still trying to protect his customers" (in response to the idiotic statement made on Gox's site).
So, "Mr Regulatory Affairs Committee" appears to be criminally stupid (sarcasm meant on the "criminally” part of that comment), and not someone I would want to possess any form of power in an organisation that purports to be the people's representative.
Isn't this the same for politics and governments? I would like to see the foundation play a more pro-active role in the regulation of bitcoin community
The forum is kind of funny given hardly anyone uses it. There were some complaints made on it that it was public. Some members prefer to chat in private.
Regarding members, I see from the website that there are about 1000, many of which are annual members.
We have a minority that has set itself up as spokesperson for bitcoin. This minority is led by business, and therefore can never escape the influence of the Foundation's leading figures (and their interests).
I hope it becomes irrelevant or that ordinary people infiltrate it to the point that they can counteract the poor decision-making so far shown.
Either way, in its current state it as about as useful as dog turd on a shoe.
Regarding members, I see from the website that there are about 1000, many of which are annual members.
We have a minority that has set itself up as spokesperson for bitcoin. This minority is led by business, and therefore can never escape the influence of the Foundation's leading figures (and their interests).
I hope it becomes irrelevant or that ordinary people infiltrate it to the point that they can counteract the poor decision-making so far shown.
Either way, in its current state it as about as useful as dog turd on a shoe.
They misspell Cyprus on an official release? That's amateurish. Cypress is a TREE. Cyprus is a country.
That's not an official release, just a forum post by a member.
They misspell Cyprus on an official release? That's amateurish. Cypress is a TREE. Cyprus is a country.
Not a press release, only a forum post, but you have to pay $25 in order to post in that forum, which makes it kinda formal.
They misspell Cyprus on an official release? That's amateurish. Cypress is a TREE. Cyprus is a country.
They did secure the resignation of MtGox, which is more than I expected they would be able to do.
No, they did not. If you eat an apple, do you say that the apple managed to get eaten? They responded to MtGox's resignation in the only way they could, so they are acted up on, not acting. The only way an apple can respond to an eater is, frankly, to accept be eaten.
ofcourse they are not interested in relaying any info because the bitcoin foundation only works if all members circlejerk each other rigorously (and by works i mean work for the board members not the community).
they are imho criminal in positioning themselves where they have in the bitcoin eco-system and ignoring problems.
they have done absolutely NOTHING to warn users about a bad seed that they have known about who is a gold member and LOL board member.
criminals and cannibals... any better than run-of-the-mill bankster out in AFK. nope... actually just the same.
...and they have a TOTALLY unregulated market to rape and plunder (yes i am still talking about board members of the foundation, not mtgox, though it could be both (which it actually is)).
they are imho criminal in positioning themselves where they have in the bitcoin eco-system and ignoring problems.
they have done absolutely NOTHING to warn users about a bad seed that they have known about who is a gold member and LOL board member.
criminals and cannibals... any better than run-of-the-mill bankster out in AFK. nope... actually just the same.
...and they have a TOTALLY unregulated market to rape and plunder (yes i am still talking about board members of the foundation, not mtgox, though it could be both (which it actually is)).
@ Jeronimus
Yes, I agree with you. In principle it can be a force for good, as it implies on its website.
But it is not that, nor appears to be on its way to becoming that.
Just to note that a few of the guys on the foundation forum, just ordinary members, seem to be clued up. Unfortunately they lack power and can only make sensible observations. But we can do that here, so unless a drastic change occurs I still fail to see that the foundation is acting for "users worldwide".
All the senior members, twitter links on the site, ignored my attempts to contact them, and continued to tweet banalities (Jon Matonis did say something vague to give him a minuscule amount of credit).
Yes, I agree with you. In principle it can be a force for good, as it implies on its website.
But it is not that, nor appears to be on its way to becoming that.
Just to note that a few of the guys on the foundation forum, just ordinary members, seem to be clued up. Unfortunately they lack power and can only make sensible observations. But we can do that here, so unless a drastic change occurs I still fail to see that the foundation is acting for "users worldwide".
All the senior members, twitter links on the site, ignored my attempts to contact them, and continued to tweet banalities (Jon Matonis did say something vague to give him a minuscule amount of credit).
How did the BTC Foundation secure Karpeles' resignation? This is the first I have heard of that "news"?
Karpeles resigned by his own volition as far as I know.
If I am wrong, perhaps someone would be kind enough to post a link which shows the above to be matter of fact.
Thanks.
Edit: The petition link above did not come from foundation members, it was a petition to the foundation.
Karpeles resigned by his own volition as far as I know.
If I am wrong, perhaps someone would be kind enough to post a link which shows the above to be matter of fact.
Thanks.
Edit: The petition link above did not come from foundation members, it was a petition to the foundation.
They already had some evidence that MtGox was not doing good but they kept silence, which hurt a lot of people who continued to trust it.
If you read the thread on their forum around the time of the petition to remove Karpeles, it's clear that they are unhappy with the situation but are constitutionally unable to remove him except for cause.That's why I was surprised they were able to secure his resignation.
https://bitcoinfoundation.org/forum/index.php?/topic/740-petition-to-remove-mark-karpeles-from-the-bitcoin-foundation-board/
They don't know what happened to their "gold member" MtGox until the last day.
I wonder when did they know that MtGox was insolvency?
Just yesterday that they published the joint announcement? I think it should be much earlier than that.
They already had some evidence that MtGox was not doing good but they kept silence, which hurt a lot of people who continued to trust it.
I wonder when did they know that MtGox was insolvency?
Just yesterday that they published the joint announcement? I think it should be much earlier than that.
They already had some evidence that MtGox was not doing good but they kept silence, which hurt a lot of people who continued to trust it.
I expected better from the Foundation. This was a major crisis and the Foundation did nothing, said nothing, reported nothing. Even now the website is blank, just a few boring blog entries.
I wonder what its purpose is. It claims:
"Bitcoin Foundation standardizes, protects and promotes the use of Bitcoin cryptographic money for the benefit of users worldwide."
However it appears to be cowardly and not interested in "the benefit of users worldwide". Understandably it could not throw accusations around without evidence. But completely ignoring what we all knew was a crisis for bitcoin, or at least a crisis for many bitcoin users (or former users as the case may be) is a dereliction of duty in my opinion.
I see no point to its existence, and wonder why it exists, or why anyone would join now.
Looking at the membership fees, I see Platinum and Gold membership, which of course will be taken by industry, costs $100k and $25k.
Average Joe pays $25.
My point is that it seems more interested in protecting itself and its higher members than individuals that use the "currency".
To demonstrate its attitude, or at least the attitude of the legal team, I would post this from a few days ago from Todd Erickson of Foundation's Regulatory Affairs Committee.
To me it demonstrates that although we should police BTC ourselves and regulation would ruin the "essence" of the system, the Foundation is no use to users, and actually quite obnoxious.
I wonder what its purpose is. It claims:
"Bitcoin Foundation standardizes, protects and promotes the use of Bitcoin cryptographic money for the benefit of users worldwide."
However it appears to be cowardly and not interested in "the benefit of users worldwide". Understandably it could not throw accusations around without evidence. But completely ignoring what we all knew was a crisis for bitcoin, or at least a crisis for many bitcoin users (or former users as the case may be) is a dereliction of duty in my opinion.
I see no point to its existence, and wonder why it exists, or why anyone would join now.
Looking at the membership fees, I see Platinum and Gold membership, which of course will be taken by industry, costs $100k and $25k.
Average Joe pays $25.
My point is that it seems more interested in protecting itself and its higher members than individuals that use the "currency".
To demonstrate its attitude, or at least the attitude of the legal team, I would post this from a few days ago from Todd Erickson of Foundation's Regulatory Affairs Committee.
To me it demonstrates that although we should police BTC ourselves and regulation would ruin the "essence" of the system, the Foundation is no use to users, and actually quite obnoxious.
The foundation can be both positive and negative. I just don't think they had the right to use "foundation" as a name. They are not the founders. The founder is satoshi nakamoto whoever person or group is behind this.
However, a lot of good things can come out of it as well. The platinum member bitcoinstore for example is extremely valueable to the whole bitcoin environment. They keep a bit of an order in all this chaos, but i fully agree with you that they should be putting way more pressure on getting REAL answers from karpeles even if that means them losing the income from the gold membership.
So we have a conflict of interest here, which should not stop them from being more pressuring on the foul apples, as only this will give them a long term right to exist.
I expected better from the Foundation. This was a major crisis and the Foundation did nothing, said nothing, reported nothing. Even now the website is blank, just a few boring blog entries.
What would you have liked them to say/do?They did secure the resignation of MtGox, which is more than I expected they would be able to do.
It is unclear to me how they would achieve their stated purposes, but if people want to pay money to join clubs that is their own business.
I suspect that people pay more attention to the joint statement made by reps from the major exchanges than to anything the Bitcoin Foundation says.
Jump to: