Vote for the removal of Mike Hearn as Chair of the Bitcoin Foundations Law & Pol

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4690

Merit: 1276

Quote from: Snail2 on November 16, 2013, 06:15:33 PM

If someone goes directly against the principles of bitcoin and against the majority of the community should be removed from the organization what represents bitcoin.

If there is a mindset that the bulk of the userbase are basically tools needed to achieve an objective (e.g., growing a business, a speculative position, or a network) then it is not particularly the case that a 'majority of the community' carries much weight. In other words, users are for the most part just pawns on a chessboard or little plastic infantrymen of a desirable color.

Everything I can see of the Bitcoin Foundation points me to the conclusion that this philosophical position dominates their thinking.

Snail2

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1000

If someone goes directly against the principles of bitcoin and against the majority of the community should be removed from the organization what represents bitcoin.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: NorbyTheGeek on November 16, 2013, 09:07:39 AM

Who are you to dictate whether someone should keep their position just because you don't like an idea of his?

Regardless of how i think about this threads topic here... of course you can demand such things. If a politican claims the members or a certain race should have to leave the country because they are dirty and stink... of course you can demand he leaves his place in politics.
So when someone is speaking about things that will hurt bitcoin and means a hostile take-over because a centralized organisation can determine what coins are worth something then you can want that this person goes. That doesnt mean he has to go of course.

Anyway... this tainted coins idea is flawed from the start. Nearly every scam imaginable has some time in which the scammer can exchange the wrong coins to new clean coins. At the time the coins are marked stolen they are long owned by innocent people. And they are the second victims in the game. So you have the victims of the scammer directly, the victims of tainted coins and the scammer who is perfectly fine with his anonymous clean coins.

Tainted coins are simply useless.

niothor

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 501

in defi we trust

Quote from: aninterestedparty on November 16, 2013, 09:06:21 AM

Quote from: p2pbucks on November 14, 2013, 08:45:59 PM

he is representing the interest of US gov , not bitcoin community , expel him.if they dont , we should think about to find a replacement of btc foundation

Or we could just make our own foundation. Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's second Bitcoin foundation. We will be that foundation. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster.

In hindsight that quote didn't work as well as I hoped

We'll when do you start?
What are your plans to improve bitcoin adoption?
What's your knowledge in this field ?
....
Who are you? Cause
I'm not part of WE unless I know who YOU are!

NorbyTheGeek

full member

Activity: 201

Merit: 100

I love how reactionary and inflammatory this community can get. Granted, the most vocal parties are the minority of us.

So, here's a guy who has reportedly done a lot of positive things for Bitcoin. He sees the road ahead, that governments WILL try to regulate this currency, so he comes up with an idea that he think will work.

You can disagree with him, and you should be vocal about your disagreement if you do. If enough people disagree (and a lot of people do) then this idea will not come to fruition. But calling for his removal seems a bit overkill. It's akin to the American tendency to lynch public figures for speaking their mind. "We don't like what you said, and even though this country has freedom of speech, we want you fired from your job because we don't like what you said."

Who are you to dictate whether someone should keep their position just because you don't like an idea of his?

aninterestedparty

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Quote from: p2pbucks on November 14, 2013, 08:45:59 PM

he is representing the interest of US gov , not bitcoin community , expel him.if they dont , we should think about to find a replacement of btc foundation

Or we could just make our own foundation. Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's second Bitcoin foundation. We will be that foundation. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster.

In hindsight that quote didn't work as well as I hoped

archangel689

newbie

Activity: 15

Merit: 0

Quote from: ?? on ??

Mike Hearn has lost some credibility therefore he should immediately step down just to avoid controversy.

I voted YES because I honestly believe that he is a coward and a traitor with Keynesian mindset.
He also works for the greatest spying machine ever made.

Bye bye Keynes:

http://www.antolin-davies.com/research/mercatus1212.pdf

archangel689

newbie

Activity: 15

Merit: 0

Quote from: asyn on November 15, 2013, 03:36:46 AM

He just called for a discussion...

Which should be enough to have his head roll. He should be made an example of for anyone else that might try to suggest adding some kind of centralized influence.

beetcoin

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

what would be cool is if BTC had an in-built function to provide its holders the ability to vote.. 1 btc vote per bitcoin. the only problem is that the people with big money would have more sway and then they'd use their voting powers for self gain. so nevermind, scratch that Grin

UncleBobs

member

Activity: 103

Merit: 10

It From Bit

Quote from: TheKoziTwo on November 14, 2013, 08:26:41 PM

This "redlist" thing is just icing on the cake. His last shred of credibility was lost already back in october when he wrote this:

Quote from: Mike Hearn on October 02, 2013, 12:39:49 PM

By the way - I'm amazed at how many people are surprised that a drug dealer with extreme anarcho-capitalist tendencies turned out to be not a swell guy! Imagine that!

It was a dead giveaway. Same with people who sneer about "tinfoil hats", "libertards" and "conspiracy theorists". Pod-people. Avoid.

archangel689

newbie

Activity: 15

Merit: 0

Quote from: TheKoziTwo on November 14, 2013, 08:26:41 PM

This "redlist" thing is just icing on the cake. His last shred of credibility was lost already back in october when he wrote this:

Quote from: Mike Hearn on October 02, 2013, 12:39:49 PM

By the way - I'm amazed at how many people are surprised that a drug dealer with extreme anarcho-capitalist tendencies turned out to be not a swell guy! Imagine that!

This is a guy who wants to push his subjective perceptions of right and wrong on everyone else. Tar and feather I say.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: proudhon on November 14, 2013, 07:37:01 PM

...what he's proposing is practically impossible to prevent anyway.

It is. If you create such a server it doesnt matter because no one would follow your servers notes of bad and good coins. But its completely different when bitcoin foundation is changing the official wallets in order to implement this thing.

DoomDumas

legendary

Activity: 1002

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin

Quote from: BittBurger on November 14, 2013, 08:14:01 PM

This was the problem in making the "Bitcoin Foundation" an American organization.

They had the opportunity to take on a new representative recently and were presented with people from around the world, but chose the American Girl who spoke heartily about keeping the Bitcoin Foundation American and all other groups around the world just "satellite offices" of the USA Bitcoin Foundation.

Clearly this pissed off many, and for good reason.

Now we have a clear example of why the Bitcoin Foundation being an American organization is a bad thing.

Why is the "hub" for decision-making on Bitcoin... in the belly of the Lion?

That has to be the worst idea ever. Right in the middle of "regulation central" ...

USA is on the verge of a mega collapse.. dont worry, they will have a lot to cope with soon, BTC will be their last preocupation, because the real chaos is comming.. Let the rest of the world decide what's will be the future of BTC. I bet on Chineese to be the first country to opt out of U$ and use BTC/Gold instead ! The future may incluse a lot of suffering, it also include a better world, after all the suffering caused by the imminent collapse. I think american peoples are great, and good peoples, they are just misinfirmed, that's not their fault. I'll do my best to help in those dark years that are comming. After, we should see a lot more brightess and intelligent future !

DoomDumas

legendary

Activity: 1002

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin

Quote from: franky1 on November 14, 2013, 08:09:36 PM

bitcoin does not need identity checks supervised by the USA

while trading bitcoin for products priced in bitcoin, thats for us to supervise our own money
while trading bitcoin for altcoin , thats for us to supervise our own money
while trading altcoin for products priced in altcoin, thats for us to supervise our own money

only identity check when you want FIAT.

EG if you want to convert bitcoin into dollar to go to a bank account then and only then inside the exchange do you follow the fincen laws.
EG if you want to convert bitcoin into pounds to go to a bank account then and only then inside the exchange do you follow the FCA laws.
EG if you want to convert bitcoin into Yen to go to a bank account then and only then inside the exchange do you follow the FSA laws.
EG if you want to convert bitcoin into Euro to go to a German bank account then and only then inside the exchange do you follow the BaFin laws.
EG if you want to convert bitcoin into Euro to go to a French bank account then and only then inside the exchange do you follow the AMF laws.

you get the idea

THIS

+1

Bitcoin should'nt need ID as long as you dont touch fiat currencies.

Govt/Corp can made their rule over fiat as they want, as they do for centuries.. But dont touch Bitcoin. Bitcoin is decentralized, no entity owns it.. It's the free money, the only real free currency, made by peoples, for peoples. I agree when trading BTC/Fiat there can be as many rules, ID check or whatever "they" want. But Bitcoin MUST keep it's freedom.. This is it, accept it or not, this is the core value of Bitcoin itself.

Anyway, Bitcoin enables so many opportunity, even if "they" want to get a grip on it, it will ever exist ! They regulate it ? someday, peoples will strive to use it anonymously anyway !

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: tiaguitah on November 15, 2013, 10:53:55 AM

from peter todd:

"We've had the theoretical discussion before, multiple times. The technology involved isn't very interesting from a legal perspective and doesn't deserve more discussion. There's near consensus in the community that it's a very bad idea, for multiple reasons, regardless of your thoughts about privacy and anonymity.

If you want to discuss it further, knock yourself out. But there is every reason for community members to be worried when someone in a position of power - Mike Hearn is chair of the Foundation Legal and Policy committee - starts promoting a discredited and dangerous idea yet again. It's like finding out in 1940 that the chair of your local electricity board thinks the town needs a direct current feed and that Tesla guy got it all wrong. Sure, his arguments for DC may sound convincing to some people who are unfamiliar with the technology, but the discussion's long been settled in favor of AC by those who are. "

VOTED YES.

maybe The Foundation not as bad as I perceive it to be, this is encouraging!

tiaguitah

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 10

from peter todd:

"We've had the theoretical discussion before, multiple times. The technology involved isn't very interesting from a legal perspective and doesn't deserve more discussion. There's near consensus in the community that it's a very bad idea, for multiple reasons, regardless of your thoughts about privacy and anonymity.

If you want to discuss it further, knock yourself out. But there is every reason for community members to be worried when someone in a position of power - Mike Hearn is chair of the Foundation Legal and Policy committee - starts promoting a discredited and dangerous idea yet again. It's like finding out in 1940 that the chair of your local electricity board thinks the town needs a direct current feed and that Tesla guy got it all wrong. Sure, his arguments for DC may sound convincing to some people who are unfamiliar with the technology, but the discussion's long been settled in favor of AC by those who are. "

VOTED YES.

niothor

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 501

in defi we trust

Quote from: Gabi on November 15, 2013, 10:25:45 AM

Can't we just ignore that group? Seriously, why keep opening thread about them? They are important exactly like me and you, but it is not like i open a thread about myself saying that i am the "chairman" of something Cheesy

That's because he is a Chair , not a chairman like you
"Do you want Mike Hearn removed as Chair of the Bitcoin Foundation's Law & Policy commitee?"
He has very important task and is indispensable. Are we savages eating on the ground ? We need those chairs!!!!!!!!!

Also they are very useful when we run amok. Usually they are the first things you throw at the walls.
And I bet there will be some chairs thrown at the next conference.

Gabi

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1008

If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat

Can't we just ignore that group? Seriously, why keep opening thread about them? They are important exactly like me and you, but it is not like i open a thread about myself saying that i am the "chairman" of something Cheesy

elbill

hero member

Activity: 952

Merit: 1005

frantorres_995 at socialmedia

Bitcoin is global, I am a member of the bitcoin fundation and not of USAcoin fundation.

hacknoid

sr. member

Activity: 418

Merit: 252

Proud Canuck

Quote from: justusranvier on November 15, 2013, 03:46:59 AM

Quote from: asyn on November 15, 2013, 03:36:46 AM

Guys calm down!

He just called for a discussion and this is his job as chairmen of the law section.

Why should he get removed for starting a due discussion?

He should know better than to propose creating a blacklisting system that is such an obvious target for government overreach, the exact same government that goes and taps Google's private datacenter links.

He has suggested a discussion. Sticking your head in the sand and assuming nobody/no company would ever suggest exactly this option leaves everyone open to being blindsided by its implementation. This is EXACTLY exemplified by the coinvalidation business proposal. Don't get me wrong - I think its a bad idea (especially trying to whitelist people to be able to do business with companies), but pretending that nobody is going to suggest it is just downright stupid.

The suggestion and followup response by Gregory Maxwell is exactly the discussion that has to take place. It's the same reason we discuss(ed) the possibility of the 51% or selfish mining "attack" - so they everyone knows about the possibility and looks at it in a reasonable light. Sure, express resistance about doing it - but don't villianize someone for proposing we have a discussion.

Sheesh...

Topic: Vote for the removal of Mike Hearn as Chair of the Bitcoin Foundations Law & Pol (Read 5954 times)