The Bitcoin Foundation elections have started. Up to the 19th of February, Bitcoin Foundation individual members will vote for two new Individual Directors who will be elected to represent the individual members.
We spent some time contacting each candidate and asked them all exactly the same questions. We published the responses of those that replied and below is a summary of all the candidates ascertained from their CCN.com articles or other media outlets. You can view the full interview by clicking on a candidate’s name.
Foundation Members should now have received email instructions on how to vote.
Note: If you are eligible to vote and have problems voting, please see the end of this article.
And active speaker, advisor and investor in the Cryptocurrency sector. He would push the Foundation towards more transparency, decentralization and member engagement; to be achieved by transparent crowd funding when possible.
He does not support asking for regulation, or assisting with laws that place limits on bitcoin. But he thinks can be value in challenging, educating and communication with some (not bad actors) regulators.
He has no major concern over alternative coins; they may serve a valid need. And that the Foundation should be an international organization.
Those who seek to stop or limit Bitcoin should be fought.
He wants to ensure that any decision that the Board makes has the users (of bitcoin) thoughts in mind. To achieve this, he wants more transparency and documentation of minutes and of what the Foundation is doing coupled with user consideration in any decision he makes with the Foundation.
He does not believe in interaction from the Foundation with regulatory bodies unless the regulators come to the Foundation on the Foundation terms. That there should be no private meetings, no Foundation lobbying and no proposals for bitcoin development funding from regulatory or banking bodies.
His thoughts of alternative coins are;
It’s an interesting, diverse ecology~ fascinating to watch.
He also leaves us with a warning of banks attempting to take control of different aspects of bitcoin activity.
See’s a potential for eliminating politics through consensus technologies. He would use his seat to improve Foundation efficiency and turn the Foundation into a self-governing DAC (decentralised autonomous corporation ).
He wants the Foundation to focus on core development only. Though he does not like the concept of alternative coins, he accepts that there are other potential technologies that are entering the space.
And his thoughts on the international efforts of the Foundation are;
Nothing. Code is nation and language agnostic.
Promoting the technical infrastructure is his primary reason for running. Through financing core development, creating training programs and any other related issues, while keeping the development process decentralized.
He will provide his network of contacts and ensure the Foundation can raise funds for technical projects. He believes the Foundation should stay out of direct lobbying, but take a firm stance against regulations that discriminate against Bitcoin. And to foster collaboration with existing policy orientated organisations.
His view on alternative coins is optimistically positive.
I believe in the process of competition and it is important to Bitcoin users to have alternatives in order for the Bitcoin ecosystem to always feel the need to improve itself.
And as CEO of the Bitcoin Foundation of Canada, he thinks that the international affiliate program was not a success, that it was too ambitious and should be restructured into a looser ‘partnership’ model.
He wants to represent ‘Generation Blockchain’ (the younger generation) and to serve those in the “Bitcoin 2.0” space. He plans to work with the Foundation to provide developer conferences and a greater sense of democracy to the Foundation.
He would like to hear the views of those that wish the Foundation dismantled so that he can understand the root of their convictions. And we should not seek out regulation, but engage regulators after they have spoken to alternative policy groups (such as Coin Center or the Digital Chamber of Commerce).
He believes that alternative coins have an important role in bringing new individuals into the sector, especially ‘Bitcoin 2.0’ technologies.
He was disappointed to learn how difficult it was for international affiliates to be setup, acceptance as a foreign branch should be made far easier, with less paperwork.
…my nonprofit has added chapters on every habitable continent, with a presence in over 40 nations.
Was previously the Global Policy Counsel for the Foundation. He believes that the Foundation has not reached its potential, that its mandate needs more structure. He would follow-up and push forward his risk management study , and promote communication with the membership to make better use of members business, social and political resources.
That interaction with regulatory bodies is an unpleasant compromise, but they could greatly hinder adoption, so interaction is appropriate. However, such interaction should only occur with careful consideration.
He likes alternative coins and thinks the Foundation should support all decentralised Cryptocurrencies. And he has not been satisfied with the international efforts of the Foundation.
As Global Policy Counsel, I was sometimes embarrassed and frustrated at, not being able to help international affiliates (and others) with things they expected of me and the foundation.
He has been working on standards and certifications and wishes to continue to work in this area, using the Foundation to push these forward for community critique and feedback. He is confident that such standards will improve the state of all bitcoin services, and he would push the Foundation towards more educational events for developers
While I believe in a free market, I also believe that everyone should abide by the laws that exist in their particular jurisdictions, but recognize that this is a choice that they may make for themselves.
He does not believe the Foundation should interact with regulatory bodies, that there are suitably enough other organisations that can do this job in their respective nations.
He is wary of alternative coins ‘pump and dump’ nature, but thinks they are a great way to test different strategies for Cryptocurrency. However, his personal focus remains on bitcoin.
He would use his position to balance industry with individual influence within the Foundation while defending the protocols privacy, anonymity and decentralised factors. His team at Airbitz worked with Amir Taaki to develop Dark Market, which is being successfully forked by OpenBazaar.
He believes there should be educational interaction from the Foundation with regulatory bodies, framed in the sense that we tell them how it works, not ask them.
He loves alternative coins, the creativity that has been invested in them. And he believes the Foundation has been doing a good job internationally, that it should maintain its international reach while at the same time work with local Cryptocurrency organisations.
Bitcoin is like a rock band that released a hit record in every language around the world, simultaneously.
You can find out more information about the Candidates who did not respond to us via The Distributed Opinion;
A libertarian/voluntarist who sponsored Mike Hearn’s Lighthouse project, he has also spent over 100k in legal fees on mtgoxrecovery.com (to bring it to a good ending). He believes strongly in decentralization and transparency. He wants Board meetings to be broadcast live and to give people the opportunity to ask questions and make suggestions at the end of each meeting. He aims to push for core development to be funded through decentralised methods and advocates anything else that would diminish the Foundations power. He will only support harmless and positive initiatives.
An early adopter and entrepreneur. CEO of Flowroute has regulatory Board experience and is a Board Member of a few organisations. SMS/800 , Represent.us , Seattle Symphony Orchestra and Tech4America . He believes in a pragmatic approach to regulators, more Foundation transparency and decentralizing development. He would request for public feedback when making key decisions. And believes that the Foundation must lay the groundwork for the success of Bitcoin while protecting the integrity by decentralizing development and control that could damage the sector and network.
A long time programmer, he has been participating as a board director of various non-profits since 1995. He believes in educating the end user and for the bitcoin ecosystem to remain decentralized. He would advocate the monitoring of bitcoin events (regulation proposals, rumours, lawsuits, and related) via a database. To develop basic business and services guidelines, and building relations with Self Help Legal Publishers, to help the community navigate the legal space independently of the Foundation.
The CEO of Gyft (Gyft has been a relatively supporter of bitcoin). He ran for a Foundation board seat last year, finishing in third place. He is a speaker and supporter on bitcoin and block chain technology. He co-founded the non-profit organization, Silicon Cape Initiative (aimed at improving the environment in the Western Cape (Africa), creating startups and increasing access to capital.
The voice of the consumer.
Co-founder of Dark Wallet, and of Defense Distributed . Well known for his designs and distribution of said designs of the 3d printed guns . Anarchist activist, he see’s the Foundation as unnecessary and that it has caused harm by its appeals to government bodies. He plans to bring dissolution to the Foundation if he was elected.
Each candidate has a profile on The Distributed Opinion, with more information on the candidate and from the public who have stated their perceived pros and cons on the various standing individuals.
There have been some issues with members not registering themselves to vote. If you wanted to vote and are unable to due to this issue, then you should post in the relevant Bitcoin Foundation forums public thread (for transparency). There is no promise that you will now be able to vote, but your concern will be heard.