pmlaw / the-bitcoin-foundation-legal-repo Goto Github PK
View Code? Open in Web Editor NEWA public repo for legal documents related to The Bitcoin Foundation
A public repo for legal documents related to The Bitcoin Foundation
I have reason to believe that certain agreements that the Foundation signs with its foreign chapters contain a confidentiality clause that prohibits the chapters from discussing the terms of the agreement.
This is wrong. There is no room for backroom deals here.
As a step towards increased transparency, the affiliate/chapter agreements should not include this clause, and should be published somewhere public e.g. the Foundation's forum. This can be added to the bylaws.
There has been a lot of discussion about the Chapter program over the last year and more. Is there a current, up to date, public document that describes how well the program is doing right now, what is in the pipeline, and where you would like the program to be in 1, 2, 5 years?
I think that such a document describing the vision of the Chapter program would be helpful for us potential chapters (I am representing the Israeli Bitcoin Association here).
The purpose of this issue is to explore the topic of Anonymity and Funding.
Some more details and observations are added as part of this open issue, below, along with a tentative proposal.
Observations:
Section 2.2 The Corporation shall promote and protect both the decentralized, distributed and private nature of the Bitcoin distributed-digital currency and transaction system as well as individual choice, participation and financial privacy when using such systems. The Corporation shall further require that any distributed-digital currency falling within the ambit of the Corporation's purpose be decentralized, distributed and private and that it support individual choice, participation and financial privacy."
Proposal:
Open for discussion.
As has been brought up in the "Founding members should have no special for-life voting privileges" thread (#10), there has been talk regarding eliminating the need for a founder's class's voting rights by eliminating membership classes altogether.
I'm opposed to getting rid of the industry and individual membership classes as I feel both classes have different interests and priorities that occasionally are opposing. I feel the compromises between the interests of these two classes will result in the best route forward. However, with both classes being numerically balanced to force compromises, there will occasionally be deadlocks.
This leads to a separate issue of how to resolve deadlocks, which we can discuss as a separate topic in another thread (currently, the founding members class serves this role). I would include in that separate (and as of yet non-existent) thread whether or not the the "tie breaker class" can cast votes that cause a tie (ie, if an unequal number of other class members is not present at a meeting).
It'd be spiffy to give some guidance to people for how to create a good pull request here in a README. E.g. suggestion to run it by [email protected] for initial feedback and help in wording/legalese.
The Bitcoin Foundation Class structure was created to provide a Balanced Board.
My premise for this discussion is that the Bitcoin Foundation should understand the background rationale for this current structure and carefully review to determine if there is a better structure which is more appropriate for an organization which promotes decentralized, peer-to-peer systems.
The current chair, Peter Vessenes recently provided this backgrounder:
"I had at least a major part in constructing the multi-class board setup that we have, and can happily explain my thinking on it at the time in a few sentences:
(offtopic)
@pmlaw stated that this github repo is only meant for issues on the bylaws.
I think it's vital to have a public issue tracker for general issues. The level of discourse and engagement I got over the last few weeks has been amazing, from various Foundation staff and board members ... and it's important we have some place where we can get that level of engagement and track general issues.
I argue that the forums aren't enough, well, because they're not an issue tracking system. For that reason they attract all kinds of discussions ... but an issue tracker would attract very specific discussion and is just more suited for tracking issues.
I propose a github repo or public Zendesk be opened and used to tracking issues.
May this be the last (offtopic) issue I open on this legal repo.
I believe founding members should either have:
Founding members, while honored, are not 'benevolent dictators for life', and any special power they have over the Foundation's decisions should be up for a normal voting process.
If there is consensus on the idea, I can work on a pull request that codifies this.
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
๐ Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
A PHP framework for web artisans
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. ๐๐๐
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
Google โค๏ธ Open Source for everyone.
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
Data-Driven Documents codes.
China tencent open source team.