Topic: Bitcoin Foundation to repair relationship with community - page 3. (Read 5536 times)
If a centralized organization to put a face on Bitcoin was a good idea, then Satoshi Nakamoto would have come out to promote it.
When Andreas left the foundation, I requested a refund of my 0.3 BTC donation for lifetime membership. They denied my request.
Allowing refunds would be a great place to start building good will. Maybe if I like the new direction you take the foundation I'll donate again, but holding my donation hostage in an entity that has changed is not cool.
I don't think many/any foundation (or similar entity that accepts donations) is ever going to be willing to give refunds in the way that you request. When a foundation receives a donation they will plan their budget accordingly however if they were to honor requests to refund donations then they would have no way to make a budget. Allowing refunds would be a great place to start building good will. Maybe if I like the new direction you take the foundation I'll donate again, but holding my donation hostage in an entity that has changed is not cool.
What you are asking is also essentially that they buy people's trust
Yeah, well, most boards don't have "lifetime memberships" either. Maybe that's a pretty horrible idea?
Most boards work hand-in-glove with members at smaller, budgetable paces. They donate yearly or quarterly for their seat on the board. They sever ties by severing business propositions.
Do you realize how ridiculous it would be to say "OK, I'm going to provide my [utility service] to you at a discount forever, but I get to steer your organization for eternity as well" and PAY UP FRONT? Silly.
The USPS seems to think it's an excellent model:
When Andreas left the foundation, I requested a refund of my 0.3 BTC donation for lifetime membership. They denied my request.
Allowing refunds would be a great place to start building good will. Maybe if I like the new direction you take the foundation I'll donate again, but holding my donation hostage in an entity that has changed is not cool.
I don't think many/any foundation (or similar entity that accepts donations) is ever going to be willing to give refunds in the way that you request. When a foundation receives a donation they will plan their budget accordingly however if they were to honor requests to refund donations then they would have no way to make a budget. Allowing refunds would be a great place to start building good will. Maybe if I like the new direction you take the foundation I'll donate again, but holding my donation hostage in an entity that has changed is not cool.
What you are asking is also essentially that they buy people's trust
Yeah, well, most boards don't have "lifetime memberships" either. Maybe that's a pretty horrible idea?
Most boards work hand-in-glove with members at smaller, budgetable paces. They donate yearly or quarterly for their seat on the board. They sever ties by severing business propositions.
Do you realize how ridiculous it would be to say "OK, I'm going to provide my [utility service] to you at a discount forever, but I get to steer your organization for eternity as well" and PAY UP FRONT? Silly.
Notably, former general counsel Murck acknowledged a need to repair the foundation's relationship with the bitcoin community, even if that meant sometimes adopting unpopular or controversial positions on some issues, and taking risks with communication and transparency to demonstrate honest engagement.
He wrote:
"That means we may not always say exactly the right thing and we might not always be on message, but we will be authentic in how we interact with the community in the future and I hope that you all get to know the people who work hard to make the foundation go."
So being "on message" is not being truthful and transparent? Cool story. Maybe that's your problem?
Adopting unpopular and controverial positions on some issues is why people loathe / don't give a shit about Bitcoin Foundation in the first place.
What propaganda is this? Stating something but meaning something else and separating messaging from mission = shitty foundation with alterior motives.
It isn't difficult. State your mission and then your roles within the organization is to exemplify the mission via action or clarify the mission to explain action.
There shouldn't be a disconnect with what you are stating and what you are doing.
Relationship with community? How can you destroy something you never had? Is the community in question the members of their little trade association? This thread should really be posted on their private forum. It doesn't effect us. We're only the users of Bitcoin. We don't really matter to them.
Precisely. The Bitcoin Foundation is anything but a foundation but a little trade association which hides in their own little corner of the internet. It's best for the Bitcoin developers to ignore them and continue relying on their own medium of communication.
Unless, that is, a dev rises to the top and is able to garner a six-figure salary.
Relationship with community? How can you destroy something you never had? Is the community in question the members of their little trade association? This thread should really be posted on their private forum. It doesn't effect us. We're only the users of Bitcoin. We don't really matter to them.
Precisely. The Bitcoin Foundation is anything but a foundation but a little trade association which hides in their own little corner of the internet. It's best for the Bitcoin developers to ignore them and continue relying on their own medium of communication.
Relationship with community? How can you destroy something you never had? Is the community in question the members of their little trade association? This thread should really be posted on their private forum. It doesn't effect us. We're only the users of Bitcoin. We don't really matter to them.
I don't think many/any foundation (or similar entity that accepts donations) is ever going to be willing to give refunds in the way that you request.
I find "traditional establishments would never do this" to be a particularly uncompelling argument within the bitcoin space. The whole point of bitcoin should be to NOT make the same mistakes of traditional institutions. From this perspective, the foundation has failed so far. When their chief scientist abandoned them, and stated reasons like lack of transparency, that was a major red flag for me - and should be for any bitcoiner.
I am certainly not defending any of their actions, as I am not in any way a supporter of them, but I do think that to ask to have donations refunded would be something that is very unlikely.
If Bitcoin is the new paradigm in showing the world how a better system of things could improve their lives, and TBF has opted to be the governing body that speaks in behalf of that swift, then wouldn't it have been wiser of them to simply honor one refund, whereupon two to three more memberships would taken their place due to their kind gesture? The alternative is categorically state fuck you and the horse you came in on, thus amassing more discontent, then having to conduct an AMA on Reddit to save face after most its venerable members have flew the coop with the hope of future revenue flowing in to stay afloat.
Despite these half measures the true problem is they are trying to be the voice for a decentralized project with a centralized and hierarchical representation which is damaging in itself. The best thing they can do is fragment into multiple organizations not centrally managed and controlled by any one president.
Really?Much of the evidence shows that they (the board members) have simply sought to enrich themselves, often in very questionable ways.
One of the best thing to happen to Bitcoin is being detached from the foundation.
Lol.. was it destroyed?
I'll be waiting for that to see what he has to say
BTC foundation seem to have gone off the wrong road, and I have not seen any evidence it is even trying to get back on the right track.
If someone is looking for focused, realistic individuals/groups of professional caliber, there are some already starting to move with real money backing them, few of them with backings greater than BTC Foundation.
Yes, greater then BTC foundation. In fact, greater by orders of magnitude. Big money does see the potential in this new technology, but official groundwork needs to be laid thoroughly before any real money starts trickling in from big hands. They see the scene currently for what it is, and are not amateurish enough to just throw money at this corrupt, chaotic scene.
Some are even active in these forums. Do a little digging, and you will find them. Most of the time, they are not marketing themselves out to the degree most profiteers do these days with their coins and projects - that's one good indicator.
There are gems in the sand, and overlooked voices of reality among all the pump and dumping profiteers.
If someone is looking for focused, realistic individuals/groups of professional caliber, there are some already starting to move with real money backing them, few of them with backings greater than BTC Foundation.
Yes, greater then BTC foundation. In fact, greater by orders of magnitude. Big money does see the potential in this new technology, but official groundwork needs to be laid thoroughly before any real money starts trickling in from big hands. They see the scene currently for what it is, and are not amateurish enough to just throw money at this corrupt, chaotic scene.
Some are even active in these forums. Do a little digging, and you will find them. Most of the time, they are not marketing themselves out to the degree most profiteers do these days with their coins and projects - that's one good indicator.
There are gems in the sand, and overlooked voices of reality among all the pump and dumping profiteers.
Here's why I think TBF has been less than successful and how it can be improved:
A Bitcoin Technical Organization is not like IEEE, EFF, or Linux Foundation. It's also not like a for-profit corporation. It is a Think Tank. There are too many political and economic factors to consider and address. As a Think Tank, it must focus on projects that meet at least a general mission statement. Bitcoin itself is not a political statement because it is simply math. While some of it's properties can be argued to support some political agendas, Bitcoin itself has no political power whatsoever. It is a tool that can be used equally by any political entity simply by building clients that reflect the desired qualities. Bitcoin can be anonymous or it can be completely verified, depending on the infrastructure you develop for it. Bitcoin is what you want it to be.
A Bitcoin Think Tank will find solutions for developers that provide incentives. That means even central banks that want solutions and have the means, should be given the opportunity to have their needs addressed by the expertise a Bitcoin Think Tank can provide.
Up until now, these efforts have created a schism between developers over loyalties to financiers or ideologies. Developers have to put aside their differences and understand that we all benefit from thinking as a One Blockchain, than multiple competing chains. It was the evolution of Bitcoin 2.0 technologies that made us realize we could all use the same programming language and operating system, yet run completely different applications. Anyone that contributes to open source projects will benefit from new ideas flowing from the greatest minds in financial theory.
I propose that several Bitcoin Think Tanks are organized with whatever ideologies their leadership wants to offer. After all, volunteer organizations are only as good as the people that roll up their sleeves and work. They don't need elections. They don't need consensus. They offer results or they fail. Their financial futures can be dictated by particular interests, but somehow I don't think our best and brightest are all that motivated simply by money. This is a revolution. We need Generals, not Politicians. This isn't a popularity contest. If you believe in what we are doing and have invested in ourselves, then we all have not only the incentives, but also the moral compass to create the best new financial system possible.
To the Central Banks:
You have the opportunity to join us or die. If you join us, you can have access to the most powerful and efficient capital aggregation tools imaginable, and they can be designed to optimize your infrastructure. Bitcoin and its derivatives can offer unparalleled security, privacy, and flexibility to meet with your customers needs and compliance standards.
To the Venture Capitalist:
You have the opportunity to invest in the Next Big Thing and hold a stake in your investment simply by owning Bitcoins. Even if you invest in a project and somehow it fails, you still benefit from the successes of others.
To the People:
You have the opportunity to educate yourselves about the greatest business and career opportunities of a lifetime. Take advantage of learning about these technologies and become a member of these fine educational organizations.
A Bitcoin Technical Organization is not like IEEE, EFF, or Linux Foundation. It's also not like a for-profit corporation. It is a Think Tank. There are too many political and economic factors to consider and address. As a Think Tank, it must focus on projects that meet at least a general mission statement. Bitcoin itself is not a political statement because it is simply math. While some of it's properties can be argued to support some political agendas, Bitcoin itself has no political power whatsoever. It is a tool that can be used equally by any political entity simply by building clients that reflect the desired qualities. Bitcoin can be anonymous or it can be completely verified, depending on the infrastructure you develop for it. Bitcoin is what you want it to be.
A Bitcoin Think Tank will find solutions for developers that provide incentives. That means even central banks that want solutions and have the means, should be given the opportunity to have their needs addressed by the expertise a Bitcoin Think Tank can provide.
Up until now, these efforts have created a schism between developers over loyalties to financiers or ideologies. Developers have to put aside their differences and understand that we all benefit from thinking as a One Blockchain, than multiple competing chains. It was the evolution of Bitcoin 2.0 technologies that made us realize we could all use the same programming language and operating system, yet run completely different applications. Anyone that contributes to open source projects will benefit from new ideas flowing from the greatest minds in financial theory.
I propose that several Bitcoin Think Tanks are organized with whatever ideologies their leadership wants to offer. After all, volunteer organizations are only as good as the people that roll up their sleeves and work. They don't need elections. They don't need consensus. They offer results or they fail. Their financial futures can be dictated by particular interests, but somehow I don't think our best and brightest are all that motivated simply by money. This is a revolution. We need Generals, not Politicians. This isn't a popularity contest. If you believe in what we are doing and have invested in ourselves, then we all have not only the incentives, but also the moral compass to create the best new financial system possible.
To the Central Banks:
You have the opportunity to join us or die. If you join us, you can have access to the most powerful and efficient capital aggregation tools imaginable, and they can be designed to optimize your infrastructure. Bitcoin and its derivatives can offer unparalleled security, privacy, and flexibility to meet with your customers needs and compliance standards.
To the Venture Capitalist:
You have the opportunity to invest in the Next Big Thing and hold a stake in your investment simply by owning Bitcoins. Even if you invest in a project and somehow it fails, you still benefit from the successes of others.
To the People:
You have the opportunity to educate yourselves about the greatest business and career opportunities of a lifetime. Take advantage of learning about these technologies and become a member of these fine educational organizations.
I don't think many/any foundation (or similar entity that accepts donations) is ever going to be willing to give refunds in the way that you request.
I find "traditional establishments would never do this" to be a particularly uncompelling argument within the bitcoin space. The whole point of bitcoin should be to NOT make the same mistakes of traditional institutions. From this perspective, the foundation has failed so far. When their chief scientist abandoned them, and stated reasons like lack of transparency, that was a major red flag for me - and should be for any bitcoiner.
They should drive development in P2Pool, safer and easier wallet, do not fork unless absolute consensus reached among miners, that's everything I can think of
I don't think many/any foundation (or similar entity that accepts donations) is ever going to be willing to give refunds in the way that you request.
I find "traditional establishments would never do this" to be a particularly uncompelling argument within the bitcoin space. The whole point of bitcoin should be to NOT make the same mistakes of traditional institutions. From this perspective, the foundation has failed so far. When their chief scientist abandoned them, and stated reasons like lack of transparency, that was a major red flag for me - and should be for any bitcoiner.
I am certainly not defending any of their actions, as I am not in any way a supporter of them, but I do think that to ask to have donations refunded would be something that is very unlikely.
They lost me the day they let Brock Pierce crawl his way in
I remember this one circulating on Bitcointalk. Mark Karpeles used to be on the foundation and all the photoshops / images about him were hilarious. I like the ones where Karpeles is working at McDonalds and the other where he is holding a samurai sword.
I like the part where they say they can no longer rely on Bitcoin appreciation to fund the foundation. That's realistic.
yes, new leader, please acknowledge all people at altcoin subforum.. all 30 of them.
What are the chances of Sam Cole running to fill the position?
Jump to: