Ego much? He already is, he doesn't need your site to accomplish that.
Like it or not, Bitcoin has a barrier to entry like the internet of the 1980s. My goal is to bring the veterans of this community together in an attempt to build a path for anyone who has the desire to enter much more smoothly than we did. Jon is a voice in a small passionate community. The foundation and I both know that as this community expands those who are omitted from the conversation will fade in relevance until only the pioneers remember them not any of the rank and file. My point was that Jon has earned a place in the mindscape of bitcoin and if my course turns into what I think it has the potential to do, then he is guaranteed it if he participates.
The Foundation is misguided. They are closing doors to make Bitcoin into something PC and regulatable. My goal is to just open a door for anyone who wants to come in and let them make their own decisions. That's the freedom, we deserve.
The claim that nobody cares enough to make a pull request has been put to the test and show to be a lie.
Somehow, deciding on the representation of the community is dependent on knowing the full parameter and switch set for the git command and the pull-request mechanism of github.
As soon as someone overcomes that barrier, out come the slanderous accusations, cherry picked quotes and vague scenarios of doom. Matonis will destroy bitcoin if he's allowed to represent bitcoin.
I didn't much care about the issue. Until it became an issue of power, control and censorship.
See, there's a huge difference between using your power and control over the bitcoin.org domain to invite your buddies and favorite pundits, and using that control to exclude people because of your opinion.
Despite all the hand-waving and word games, it's a power grab, it's censorship, it's condescending and it makes me furious.
The conversation is exposing these excuses for the bullshit they are.
Whether you care about Matonis being on the press list or not, some of you might care about the fact that 2-3 people are arbitrarily making the decisions, based on personal animus and a purposefully convoluted opaque and capricious process that is being used as a cover for raw abuse of power. That's enough to pick a fight with me.
Join github.com use the free account and make your voice heard here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/161Based on previous experience on this topic, they will arbitrarily shutdown discussion in a few days at most. Do it now, or accept that bitcoin.org is the personal playground of a couple of people who don't care what the community thinks.
Aantonop is absolutely right. No one has the right to control bitcoin. We have allowed governments to usurp the internet, banks, money, speech and even life and death. We cannot let some group of people believe they can form a foundation and then suddenly control who represents "mainstream" bitcoin. It's offensive and the anathema to everything this community stands for. We should focus on making it easier for people to enter the world. To become entrepreneurs within it. To conduct commerce. And to participate in spreading the experiment to everyone. Not saying "this guy is way too extreme; let's ditch him".