Topic: Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream - page 19. (Read 46570 times)

Hear, hear. Roger Ver has my full support. I've yet to observe him do or say anything that could be called objectionable, extreme or untruthful in any way.

It may be more a sign of the times and current society that we live in that a message of peace and non-violence is found to be "unspeakable". These are not times for lily-livers and weak of heart who fear speaking the truth to power.

Just tell the truth, how hard can that be?

Indeed the press page should not be regarded "a shortlist of people that the community respects". It has nothing to do with who we personally respect, just who we trust can explain the concept as boringly and simply journalists as possible, without saying things that the journalists can blow out of proportion.

Hasn't this already happened?  Bitcoin users have been painted as illegal drug users and weapons buyers in the mainstream. 

And yet despite this Bitcoin's popularity grew to the point where the price took off.  Who cares what the mainstream media thinks?  They become more irrelevant as each day goes by.

There's no particular reason there are only 5 people there. There should be more but we wanted the press center to go live as soon as possible in order to try and catch the tail end of this media cycle, and be ready for another one should something dramatic happen and interest flares up again. It's still a work in progress.

Re: who ends up on the site. The initial criteria we used were to find people who would basically stay away from politics and stick to educating journalists about how the system works at a technical and financial level. That's it. Simple as that.

As it happens, I often agree with Jon and have enjoyed Roger's contributions to Bitcoin. But in the end I agreed with the initial version not having them there because the goal is to have people who will be reliably apolitical or, at worst, boringly mainstream.

I'd like the site to evolve over time so that journalists who explicitly want to get the libertarian perspective can easily find such people and nobody will be taken by surprise when their interviewee suddenly starts espousing unusual political views. But it's super important that this clarity exists because the media is an echo chamber - it only takes one or two stories that paint all Bitcoin users as fringe anarcho-capitalists to switch off huge swathes of people who would otherwise consider getting involved.

MtGox? Butterfly Labs? Pirate? I'm lost.

Yeah, let's add the person responsible for the most violent damage against Bitcoin done to date...

Indeed, it didn't take long ...

But then you will never get your money into bitcoin, so working with them right now is the right way to handle this otherwise look at bitfloor, we be out of luck with our money in those banks and it be like lost coins in a wallet no way to get to them.

For anyone who doesn't know me,  I'm Roger Ver.

Since discovering Bitcoin in late 2010,  it has consumed every moment of my life.

My company, Memorydealers.com was the first semi-mainstream business to accept Bitcoin as payment.

I'm directly responsible for

1. National radio advertisements on more than 100 stations for over two years. @ $2,800 / month http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pV9ptoCMyc
2. A Bitcoin Bilboard for over 2 years.  @ $1,200 / month
3. Bitcoinstore.com
4. The Bitcoin Bet  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfydIbhduu0
5. I was the first and only outside investor in Bitinstant.com, Blockchain.info, BuyBitcoin.co.kr and several others.
6. I was part of the seed investment round for  Coinlab.com, Bitpay.com, Kraken.com and several others.
7. I donated over $100,000 USD worth of Bitcoins to the Bitcoin foundation to help get it started. (value at the time of the payment)
8. I've also donated more bitcoins than I can count to various charities, organizations, and groups who's goals I support.

The reason  I have done all of the above is because of the philosophy I hold.
I think that all human interactions should be on a voluntary basis.
I'm opposed to using violence or threats to solve social problems.
I see Bitcoin, combined with the internet, as the best tool the world has ever seen for minimizing the amount of violence in our society.


What I'm advocating isn't extreme.
The governmental systems we have today,  that murder hundreds of millions of innocents,  drop nuclear bombs, enforce sanctions,  extort money under the threat of violence, control capital flow,  debase currencies,  and retard the overall rate of economic growth,  causing everyone to be poorer than they otherwise would have been, is extreme.

Whether or not I end up listed on the press page,  with every waking moment, I will continue to promote Bitcoin and the voluntary world it will help to bring us closer to.

My philosophy aside,  I do think it is clear that I'm great at promoting Bitcoin:

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2297014298001/should-bitcoin-be-regulated/

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/the-ups-and-downs-of/5037b5b402a76066bd0000da



I also think that the following people should also be added to the press page:

Jon Matonis
Erik Voorhees
Jeff Berwick
 

Bitcoin is about inclusion,  not exclusion.

Looking forward to it!

Why worry about them, there is more then a enough powerful people that want to see bitcoin succeed that I don't think that is an issue really anymore. I think a year or two back that was an issue, but we can just ignore them now.

Yes, this was added by Trace and ACK by me and jgarzik a few hours ago. This might help finding a good compromise add better address the issues that has been raised. We shall see!

"Bitcoin has neither an official organization, individuals with authority nor spokespeople."

-- quoted from bitcoin.org "Press" web page

Kind of the way we should all feel about Bitcoin if you ask me.



I know, it was a joke. Some people on these forums are cold, lifeless, humorless, overly serious, some people recognize mistakes of others but don't forgive them for it, and still some are paranoid regardless of any facts presented to them. People like majamalu probably think growing up is a spotless endeavor with flawless results and that anyone who makes mistakes is probably "untrustworthy", primarily because a single admin who refuses to give a scammer tag to *actual scammers* (BFL) decided it was so! Frankly, I'll take a guy who admits his mistakes and fixes them over someone who throws around claims that people "can't be trusted" any day.

I have no problem that Sonny (BFL) went to prison, nor what Roger Ver did, so long as the reasons they did aren't reoccurring (For Sonny, they are. I don't see Roger selling explosives through the BitcoinStore though). So why would someone claim I'm untrustworthy to carry money, operate a business, speak publicly or cook for them just because I made a prank bet and then ended up paying it anyway because I felt sorry for others? It's just more cultist assbackwards extremist paranoia that makes all bitcoiners look like kooks.

In line with the original topic of this thread, I remember the Reddit and Forum threads about "Keep[ing] Amir off TV!". It was a disgusting display of pigs slopping over each other to say the least. "He's not dressed right!". He's also not trying to be the "representative of Bitcoin". Everyone here is a representative of bitcoin everytime we talk, and we will all have different view points. The point of this thread was to discuss people whom we can *all* agree more or less will cover the topics in a way we can all agree with. I don't think Roger Ver's viewpoint about how Bitcoin will destory the governments is one I would be proud support, nor do I believe anyone on this forum who claims that Bitcoin was invented for tax evasion should ever be chosen for that role either.

How about someone who talks about Bitcoin leading digital currency evolution and making it easier for people to *share*? Why is everything about VENGEANCE TOWARDS THE BANKS and KILLING OUR MASTERS? Better yet, how about someone who can publicly admit that Bitcoin could fail, that it is a project and an experiment, and that it is most likely that it will simply lead the way to better alternatives and not be the end-all solution in and of itself? In other words, a fucking realist (or as some of you would probably mislabel them, "BITCOIN DETRACTORS").

I don't use exchanges to buy or sell bitcoins. I have other sources and I move them around to people that want them in my social and business circles.

Ok, just be careful - some of them have scammed many people in the (not so distant) past.

First, I think Bitcoin is amazing but it is objectively way less important than the invention of fire, electricity, the contraceptive pill, and a bunch of other stuff. You'd rather have Bitcoin or antibiotics?

Second, it is naive to think that the future has already been written. There's nothing ineluctable about Bitcoin and its image will impact its adoption. Put Ben Laden in charge of the PR, and you will see what will happen to your beloved currency (hint: it won't be pretty).

There's no working with banks. I'll use the banks if it suits my agenda just like they do with us, but I have no interest in working with them.

Says nothing about the site you linked...



Bitfloor, was doomed from the start. Roman is a software guy he didn't have a good idea of how to legally operate and claimed he had lawyers but they pointed him in the wrong way. That was Roman's fault not the banks.

Remember we should be working with banks not against especially for businesses. That is where you are being wrong.