If there is so much angst against the foundation, why don't people just organise a new one?
Because we're too lazy. It's much easier to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about the current one.
Topic: I just paid the $100K USD via BTC to become a Platinum Member of TBF. - page 2. (Read 19915 times)
October 22, 2014, 08:14:26 PM
Because we're too lazy. It's much easier to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about the current one.
October 22, 2014, 04:45:16 PM
Because we're too lazy. It's much easier to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about the current one.
Many of us are opposed to any foundation representing bitcoin and prefer the protocol to remain mercurial, fluid, and dynamic.
All of the forums combined represent the metaphorical foundation.
^
|
V
AFAIK, no one has been able to prove anyone has paid a membership fee...the foundation doesn't publish a privacy violating list of payers / identities & addresses...duh. The expectation that large membership fees would be paid in a single tx is a bit misguided, imho.
Well, I had understood that they promised to accept donations only through a specific address, precisely so that everybody could check their accounting.
But that is indeed an interesting philosophical question: how can we get to trust a Foundation devoted to the cause of a trustless anonymous payment system.
The question is, why do we need a foundation and what has having one done for Bitcoin? Look at the bylaws of the foundation. Specifically, the permanent founding members list. Do you trust an organization with members that can't be removed?
October 22, 2014, 04:40:55 PM
Because we're too lazy. It's much easier to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about the current one.
Many of us are opposed to any foundation representing bitcoin and prefer the protocol to remain mercurial, fluid, and dynamic.
All of the forums combined represent the metaphorical foundation.
October 22, 2014, 04:31:45 PM
If there is so much angst against the foundation, why don't people just organise a new one?
Because we're too lazy. It's much easier to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about the current one.
October 22, 2014, 03:58:18 PM
If there is so much angst against the foundation, why don't people just organise a new one?
October 22, 2014, 09:24:48 AM
Proof can be seen here: https://blockchain.info/address/1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
https://bitcoinfoundation.org/support/
Now that I, too, am a Platinum Member of The Bitcoin Foundation, I'm really going to start stirring up some shit.
Quick aside: davout, I'm still waiting for you to clarify my bitcoin address so that can return my stolen 1,132 BTC currently residing in one of your bitcoin wallets.
https://bitcoinfoundation.org/support/
Quote
Your membership funds our efforts to standardize, protect and promote Bitcoin.
Industry members must join by April 15, 2014 to be eligible to vote on the two industry board seats up for election in April 2014. Any industry member with a valid industry membership may nominate an individual to run in the election up to the April 7, 2014 nomination deadline. Because both board seats are industry board seats, only industry members are eligible to nominate individuals for and vote in the April 2014 election.
We offer two membership options for individuals, annual and lifetime, as well as three membership tiers for industry: silver, gold, and platinum. All memberships include one vote in their membership class and access to our member forums where you’ll be able to provide input on foundation initiatives, join a committee, or volunteer. Industry memberships include additional benefits outlined here.
We only accept Bitcoin as payment for members dues. Our membership pricing is pegged directly to the market value of Bitcoin, updated on a daily basis. For current membership pricing options, please create an account.
To promote transparency and enforce fair voting procedures, we require a real name and address for all members. Please note that member dues paid to records that do not include a real name and mailable address will not be refunded.
If you would prefer to support the Bitcoin Foundation without joining as a member, you can do so by donating to the address listed on our donate page, but note that donors do not receive member voting rights or other benefits.
Industry members must join by April 15, 2014 to be eligible to vote on the two industry board seats up for election in April 2014. Any industry member with a valid industry membership may nominate an individual to run in the election up to the April 7, 2014 nomination deadline. Because both board seats are industry board seats, only industry members are eligible to nominate individuals for and vote in the April 2014 election.
We offer two membership options for individuals, annual and lifetime, as well as three membership tiers for industry: silver, gold, and platinum. All memberships include one vote in their membership class and access to our member forums where you’ll be able to provide input on foundation initiatives, join a committee, or volunteer. Industry memberships include additional benefits outlined here.
We only accept Bitcoin as payment for members dues. Our membership pricing is pegged directly to the market value of Bitcoin, updated on a daily basis. For current membership pricing options, please create an account.
To promote transparency and enforce fair voting procedures, we require a real name and address for all members. Please note that member dues paid to records that do not include a real name and mailable address will not be refunded.
If you would prefer to support the Bitcoin Foundation without joining as a member, you can do so by donating to the address listed on our donate page, but note that donors do not receive member voting rights or other benefits.
Now that I, too, am a Platinum Member of The Bitcoin Foundation, I'm really going to start stirring up some shit.
Quick aside: davout, I'm still waiting for you to clarify my bitcoin address so that can return my stolen 1,132 BTC currently residing in one of your bitcoin wallets.
Should of had a v8
October 22, 2014, 09:22:14 AM
Lol, Phinneas Gage has pwned more people than anyone I have ever seen, with this thread.
Completely agree.
And getting back to the matter Phin raised - will TBF provide evidence that they correctly received the USD$100k donation from KnC to validate KnC's Platinum Membership and associated voting privileges?
Silence on this matter is not indicative of lack of transparency it is indicative of corruption.
October 22, 2014, 02:44:19 AM
Wow man, this is a lot of cash. Thats huge cash, you must be very rich, or don't know what you are doing or ... i don't know something about Bitcoin Foundation where are actually criminals and scammers :/
Wish you the best though
Wish you the best though
October 22, 2014, 02:28:03 AM
You know what I can't believe about this thread? How many bitcoiners participating in sig campaigns came here to only commit on its title, extremely few taking the time to read the OP, let alone subsequent posts or to glance at the last page, doing such to only satisfy their contract arrangement to get paid off my efforts.
Sig campaigns seem to be this forums whole purpose now. That's why I have show signatures turned off.
October 22, 2014, 02:19:05 AM
You are kidding , arent you . This cant be real ... i mean what makes this tbf so special
Pay $100K then steal $50 Million or more... learn from history.
How is that
by paying that money he became on their staff or what exactly because I didn't understand very well 
October 21, 2014, 11:23:00 PM
I see it a bit differently. My view is that if a government agency wanted to exert their heavy hand, as NY did with subpoenas, then there should be nobody to address that subpoena to.
But if an agency or body such as a Senate committee wished to simply discuss a matter, and have facts entered into the record concerning it, there perhaps should be individuals whom would talk with them.
Maybe a group with no structure or leaders could ad hoc nominate on the spot such a person. I don't know if that would work. But it might be the right direction of the question.
But if an agency or body such as a Senate committee wished to simply discuss a matter, and have facts entered into the record concerning it, there perhaps should be individuals whom would talk with them.
Maybe a group with no structure or leaders could ad hoc nominate on the spot such a person. I don't know if that would work. But it might be the right direction of the question.
I think we mostly agree. A group or individuals can be asked at any time by governments. This list can easily be found by looking up edits on github or asking outspoken public figures. We as the community could encourage certain individuals to represent us like Andreas Antonopoulos but this is largely irrelevant because industry bitcoin leaders and prominent speakers will naturally offer to contribute without us voting them in as has been the case.
Where we may disagree is the fact that I like that the mainstream press gets opportunities to interview a wide range of bitcoin proponents from being eloquent, weird or controversial. This makes bitcoin more inclusive and is an honest representation of its users. I don't want slick "representatives" sugar coating bitcoin for the world to digest and would rather have honesty instead.
You are certainly correct that as always has been the case in history, the narcissistic sociopaths, glib talkers, and many other varieties generally promoting their own self interest will be eager to step forth and shine in the spotlight.
I view this as irrelevant as the actual decentralized trend will sweep them away as little bits of flotsam on a breaking wave.
October 21, 2014, 11:10:59 PM
You know what I can't believe about this thread? How many bitcoiners participating in sig campaigns came here to only commit on its title, extremely few taking the time to read the OP, let alone subsequent posts or to glance at the last page, doing such to only satisfy their contract arrangement to get paid off my efforts.
October 21, 2014, 10:37:09 PM
I see it a bit differently. My view is that if a government agency wanted to exert their heavy hand, as NY did with subpoenas, then there should be nobody to address that subpoena to.
But if an agency or body such as a Senate committee wished to simply discuss a matter, and have facts entered into the record concerning it, there perhaps should be individuals whom would talk with them.
Maybe a group with no structure or leaders could ad hoc nominate on the spot such a person. I don't know if that would work. But it might be the right direction of the question.
But if an agency or body such as a Senate committee wished to simply discuss a matter, and have facts entered into the record concerning it, there perhaps should be individuals whom would talk with them.
Maybe a group with no structure or leaders could ad hoc nominate on the spot such a person. I don't know if that would work. But it might be the right direction of the question.
I think we mostly agree. A group or individuals can be asked at any time by governments. This list can easily be found by looking up edits on github or asking outspoken public figures. We as the community could encourage certain individuals to represent us like Andreas Antonopoulos but this is largely irrelevant because industry bitcoin leaders and prominent speakers will naturally offer to contribute without us voting them in as has been the case.
Where we may disagree is the fact that I like that the mainstream press gets opportunities to interview a wide range of bitcoin proponents from being eloquent, weird or controversial. This makes bitcoin more inclusive and is an honest representation of its users. I don't want slick "representatives" sugar coating bitcoin for the world to digest and would rather have honesty instead.
October 21, 2014, 10:14:26 PM
i would not drop a dime on them..
100k is crazy to join and not even be sure u did!
100k is crazy to join and not even be sure u did!
October 21, 2014, 10:06:31 PM
I agree with that. But consider that TBF has a rep going to a US Senate hearing.
Bitcointalk does not.
But it could have....
Bitcointalk does not.
But it could have....
I wish it wouldn't. Bitcoin is sovereign and does not need to placate politicians. If a government wishes to consult with any developer or bitcoin advocate they can.
I don't think it was a coincidence that Satoshi went dark the moment Gavin mentioned he would talk with the CIA, nor do I believe it was wrong for Gavin to have the right to speak with the CIA and can also understand his motivations. What we don't need is any formal representatives or company in our community. In fact we should have a diverse group of users and forums representing Bitcoin in a decentralized manner.
I see it a bit differently. My view is that if a government agency wanted to exert their heavy hand, as NY did with subpoenas, then there should be nobody to address that subpoena to.
But if an agency or body such as a Senate committee wished to simply discuss a matter, and have facts entered into the record concerning it, there perhaps should be individuals whom would talk with them.
Maybe a group with no structure or leaders could ad hoc nominate on the spot such a person. I don't know if that would work. But it might be the right direction of the question.
October 21, 2014, 09:45:53 PM
i dont get why u spent so much on this guys who do nothing for us just plan to make themselves rich.
but this is crazy money for me. propably for u its pennies!
but this is crazy money for me. propably for u its pennies!
October 21, 2014, 05:24:17 PM
I agree with that. But consider that TBF has a rep going to a US Senate hearing.
Bitcointalk does not.
But it could have....
Bitcointalk does not.
But it could have....
I wish it wouldn't. Bitcoin is sovereign and does not need to placate politicians. If a government wishes to consult with any developer or bitcoin advocate they can.
I don't think it was a coincidence that Satoshi went dark the moment Gavin mentioned he would talk with the CIA, nor do I believe it was wrong for Gavin to have the right to speak with the CIA and can also understand his motivations. What we don't need is any formal representatives or company in our community. In fact we should have a diverse group of users and forums representing Bitcoin in a decentralized manner.
October 21, 2014, 05:12:57 PM
you paid $100k to join this corrupt and pathetic organization? I don't believe it.
Lol, Phinneas Gage has pwned more people than anyone I have ever seen, with this thread.This thread is based upon a lie, perhaps it should be allowed to die?
...or is 'deception' to expose deception a good way to do things?
Yes, things have to be sufficiently subtle to be well, interesting. ...or is 'deception' to expose deception a good way to do things?
October 21, 2014, 05:11:41 PM
Probably it would be nice to have an organization of USERS and CONSUMERS of bitcoin. Just to make clear the differentials.
So, the answer is we already have this organization and its called bitcointalk?
Bitcointalk does not.
But it could have....
October 21, 2014, 03:14:55 PM
You are kidding , arent you . This cant be real ... i mean what makes this tbf so special
Pay $100K then steal $50 Million or more... learn from history.
Jump to: