Topic: The Bitcoin Foundation Must Remove Satoshi as Founder - page 3. (Read 6143 times)

This is honestly what I was thinking as I read this.

Who said I have to prove it?
Who said you have to prove it?

No one has to prove anything (unless they want to win an argument).

Its like this. I can say that monkeys fly out of my ass. I can prove it, but you cant see the evidence.
To disprove it you have to investigate my ass. I won't alow yopu to do that.
You have to prove it without the evidence. Do you see where the logic is missing?

In a debate or argument,  burden of proof lies on whoever makes an assertion.
However, one can also simply choose not to provide proof
and not participate in the debate to begin with.

Oooh thems fightin words.  Lol jk.

No but seriously, why would someone invest in something they won't believe in?
What do you "truly believe in"?

I believe bitcoin is an amazing idea that has been well implemented and has solid support and momentum.
I also am an investor because i am expecting others to see the value in it and adopt it at some point as a superior form of money.

Not how it works. If Gavin has the proof it's up to him to deliver. Not the other way around

Exactly.  You can't prove that Satoshi gave permission.  You can't prove that he didn't give permission.  Therefore, stop speaking on his behalf and let him speak for himself if he wants to.


No. He doesn't. Why should he waste his time jumping through every hoop that every random internet user in the world sets up for him.  If you want the name removed, you need to prove that it doesn't belong there.


Exactly.  The bitcoin foundation is innocent until proven guilty.  If you can't prove that they are acting fraudulently by using the name, then they are presumed innocent.

You cant disprove anything. If Satoshi sendt a message to Gavin, then gavin have to come up with the proof. Just as you cant disprove anything else. Inosent untill prove guilty

too many opinions and hypotheticals about what 'satoshi' believes and disbeleives.

ill just leave you with this.

do you really think that jesus christ wants to be known as the founder of the greedy Vatican, the pedophile priests and the congregation that hates their fellow man, judging each other?

in either case bitcoin or religion, who cares, its not like both people are going to come back and smite anyone tied to such gross abuses of wealth and disgusting behavior

You can prove that Satoshi didn't send a message to Gavin giving permission?  You can prove that when Satoshi stopped communicating publicly, he also stopped communicating privately?  You can prove that none of the other members of the bitcoin foundation actually are Satoshi?

The claim that Satoshi was a founder might be a lie.  And if it is a lie, then it's wrong.

It also might be the truth.  Since you can't prove it either way, only Satoshi can speak for himself.  If he doesn't demand that his name be removed, then he is giving implicit permission.

You are welcome to have as many "central points" as you like.


Only to those foolish enough to think that some private club is representative of something public.  Does the "Chicago Sailing Club" represent Chicago to the masses?  Foolish people will be fooled by private club giving themselves a fancy name.  I can't control the beliefs of others.


This is wild speculation.  Can you prove this?  It might be true, but it very well might not.  Regardless, the reason that people are using bitcoin has no bearing on the legitimacy or behaviors of the bitcoin foundation.


This is not what the bitcoin foundation does, or why it exists.  You are taking your own hopes and projecting them on an entity that you don't understand just because it has a name that you like.  You might want to reconsider that.

Specifically, what coordinated efforts to advertise Bitcoin have you seen from the bitcoin foundation?

The bitcoin foundation exists to pay some developers some money so they can enact the features that their highest paying membership prefers.  It also exists to make sure that when news organizations or political organizations want answers to questions, the answers are the ones that the highest paying members prefer.

Listing him takes away cedebillity from the foundation.
people might look it up and think.... hmm ok they lied there. What else are they lying about

Except I don't think that was actually him but an impostor. I very much doubt they got his permission. Maybe they asked but he probably didnt reply.

And on the question of being an "alleged pedophile" - if he has not been convicted, hasn't been charged and isn't even under investigation, then he is innocent, like everyone else until proven guilty.

Caveat: I don't know anything about the guy in question. Nor am I interested in reading anything about him.

If Satoshi wanted to be removed as a Founder, he would of said so. Just like he messaged, " I am not Dorian Nakamoto"

And, no one cares, Satoshi made Bitcoin, let him be a founder until he decides he doesn't want to anymore..

Out of interest, has anyone ever asked the Foundation whether SN is listed with his/her/their permission?

"Unless you are Satoshi, or unless he has given permission for you to speak on his behalf, the bitcoin foundation has as much right to speak on his behalf as you do."

The bitcoin foundation was created after Satoshi stopped speaking. Therefore the claim that satoshi was a founder is an outright lie. To lie is wrong so, that's it, his name should not be listed as a founder of a foundation which elects an alleged pedofile as a director.

Unless you are Satoshi, or unless he has given permission for you to speak on his behalf, the bitcoin foundation has as much right to speak on his behalf as you do.  Since you've already made it clear that you believe that you have the right to speak on his behalf, this would seem to imply that in your worldview, the bitcoin foundation ALSO has the right to speak on his behalf.  Unless of course you are a hypocrite that believes that there are special rules that only apply to you, and not them.

Let Satoshi speak for himself.  If he doesn't care enough to get involved in this disagreement, then why do you think it's important.  Satoshi clearly doesn't think that "an innocent man's life might be in danger" over this, and is therefore ok with what the bitcoin foundation has chosen to say about his membership.


No, it isn't.  The onus is on you to prove that Satoshi doesn't want to be listed as a founder.  Otherwise, you have no right to speak on his behalf.


If they wanted to do that, they already would have.  How exactly do you intend to force them to do so?  By creating another discussion thread in the bitcointalk.org disccusion forum?  That didn't seem to work so well the few hundred times that other people tried it.  Why would your rant be any more successful?


"THE man himself"?  You do realize that Satoshi doesn't have any special super powers, right?  He's not God or anything like that.  He's just some guy (or group of people) that happen to have come up with a pretty decent way of handling distributed consensus and used it to determine what order transaction occur in.  That's about it.  He wasn't even a very great programmer, or great at cryptography.  He made several programming mistakes, and made some questionable cryptography choices.

The fact that a decent programmer with some better than average knowledge about cryptography belongs to some private club shouldn't matter to anyone except those foolish enough to believe that celebrity is persuasive.

The post quoted above didn't happen.