Reason to trust
How Our News is Made
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Ad discliamer
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
A number of Bitcoin Foundation members, unhappy with the current direction of the Foundation, have started to resign.
That’s according to this forum forum post on the Bitcoin Foundation board, in which annual member Patrick Alexander starts the thread with a resignation announcement:
“Unfortunately I must resign as an individual member of the Bitcoin Foundation,” Alexander writes in his post.
He points to Charlie Shrem (former BitInstant CEO and accused money launderer), Mark Karpeles (former Mt. Gox CEO), and Brock Pierce (newly-elected board member who has dealt with legal issues of his own) as reasons why the Foundation is headed the wrong way.
“This is not the direction this foundation needs to take. The foundation members need to emulate very high moral values and ethics in business and in personal dealings, especially as it involves money. So far, the track record of prominent Bitcoin Foundation members has been abysmal. I know that most foundation members are probably swell people and are not like this. However, the acts of a few, have overshadowed us all unfortunately,” he writes.
“I no longer want to be associated with these people… It is my wish that as the Bitcoin Foundation lay in ashes, another organization can rise up from these ashes and take its proper place representing the great idea that is bitcoin.”
Alexander’s post has seemingly started a minor domino effect, with a number of other users saying they wish to throw in the towel.
“I am also resigning as a lifetime member,” wrote Olivier Janssens. “If the bitcoin foundation is to be taken seriously, they need to immediately remove Brock Pierce from the board and save face. Brad, there are plenty more allegations than what you brought up. There are active lawsuits on corporate fraud and child porn. This is NOT the type of associations you want to have for Bitcoin, especially not with the [mainstream media] trying to pull every stunt in the book.”
Says Pierre Rochard, another annual member:
“I’ve always been quick to defend the Bitcoin Foundation, but this is too much. Effective immediately I would like to terminate my annual membership with the Bitcoin Foundation. Please remove my name from the Bitcoin Foundation website.”
By no means is this a large-scale movement, but it’s an interesting scenario. The thread has managed to become a popular link this weekend on the bitcoin page at Reddit.com.
The Bitcoin Foundation is no stranger to community backlash. Recently, the blogger behind the Two-Bit Idiot website threatened to expose corruption at the Foundation.
He did not follow through.
What do you think of the situation? Is it a big deal about nothing or do you think these people have valid concerns?
[textmarker color=”C24000″]Source[/textmarker] Bitcoin Foundation Forums
Erik 
Sebuh 
Lion ThePhoenix 
ReverendJohnny 
Charles Evans 
Tentmaster 
Well it just sounds to me that they are running scared. If that’s the case go hide, and let the real men take over
Maybe the process of getting on the board should be changed, if the wrong people are getting on it.
Mark Karpless: they should have asked more and better questions sooner, it was very clear something was wrong earlier on.
Charlie Shrem: really did not do anything wrong either. He traded FIAT for bitcoin and or via versa. By that account everybody ever using FIAT is a criminal.
Brock Pierce: What I could find out about him is that is boss this something wrong, if that’s something to punish for we are all guilty of something.
edit: I must admit he looks fishy but still it not my place to judge, we have courtrooms for that.
So what’s the real reason ? I would think the election process is broken
I have met Brock Pierce in person and he is a great guy. This small exuodus is just going after media attention. Seems like the foundation has other issues then its board members.
sebuh!!
Why doesn’t a group just start their own Bitcoin Foundation? Who are these guys anyway and what power do the wield?
Do you want to spend your time doing that?
As detractors resign, as I did right after the previous scandal, the concentration of staunch supporters increases.
While this might please the staunch supporters, it could slow Bitcoin’s adoption by the mainstream.
Histrionics over unfavorable election outcome. This diverts attention from real issues. Move on.
I believe in advancing the interests of the bitcoin community. This cannot be as effective under the shadow of criminal allegations such as Olivier Janssens points out “There are active lawsuits on corporate fraud and child porn.” To represent high ethical standards one must uphold high ethical standards. While no persons are liable nor guilty prior to authoritative judicial findings it also seems there needs to be some mechanism in place within the Foundation which can graciously and adeptly make membership status changes in order to keep the Foundation free of current or potentially future membership attainment. Apparently – and based on current membership feedback – this should be a higher priority for the current Foundation management. While I have been seriously considering membership in the Foundation this thread has become a show stopper for me. These well intended and important concerns need to be dealt with, or a new responsive body formed which can meet the ethical imperatives of the fledging bitcoin community.