BitcoinTalk is 62% certain that Qc2 is the correct move.

90% was the default, I'll put it at 2 * 2nd place % from now on

Here's how I interpreted the results:
Qc2
neochiny
jjacob
actmyname
Taras
languagehasmeaning
Qh4
Foxpup
abacus
Qf4
Timelord2067

Oops, I couldn't contain myself and made more charts.

Vote summary
The dotted line here is 2 times the second most popular option.


Game statistics
I will be measuring three health indices of the BitcoinTalk team: Confidence, Synchrony and Integrity.

The Confidence Index is the percentage of votes that went to the winning move. If it is high, then that move was obvious or planned. If it is low, the community was unsure or divided about how to proceed. The Synchrony Index is 1/n, where n is the number of options that received a vote. Low synchrony means many options received votes, and high synchrony means that everyone went for the same few options. Low synchrony is not usually a bad thing, especially if confidence is high. The Integrity Index is a measure of how seriously the game is being taken. It is the percentage of how many votes cast were for serious moves. Absurd and invalid votes, even after being revised or removed, are included in this index. If integrity is any lower than 50%, BitcoinTalk is likely to lose without moderation. If the Confidence and Synchrony indices are equal, all options had the same number of votes. If they are both at 100%, only one option received any votes. If all three indices are at 100%, and many people voted, well that's a perfect world. If Confidence is extremely high and Integrity is extremely low, we're being trolled. I will probably modify the Synchrony algorithm later to be more readable on the chart. Honestly I just like playing with graphs.

10. Nc3 please

I like to play chess but it's time consuming take long time to finish like cricket.

That's a no-brainer. Nc3 controls the centre, puts pressure on b5, and defends the e-pawn. Nd2 achieves nothing, and is actively harmful as it blocks the retreat of the easily-attacked dark-squared bishop. The bishop's vulnerability is one of my reasons for wanting to play Nc3 first: it keeps Black's knight away from d5, making Bf4 or Be3 safer (we don't want to trade our bishop for a knight at this stage).

I wouldn't. 10. b3 is bad enough to merit a question mark, in my opinion. 8. d3 committed us to developing the queen's bishop to the kingside. We can't afford to waste a tempo on a queenside fianchetto. We need to get our rooks together as soon as possible, and that means developing the knight and bishop in two moves, not three. We can then break on the d-file and begin our attack. In games between masters and amateurs, extremely indecisive moves like 10. b3? are exactly the sort of mistake that the master will capitalise on.

Um, we have a better chance of winning? That's what usually happens when the opponent plays bad moves!

Boris Spassky would want a word with you. After 12. Nbd2, Black's queenside is extremely weak.

But allows the very strong 12. Ne3.

This is the best refutation. It's a decent trade for White; that Black knight is quite annoying. But more importantly, it opens the d-file at a moment when White can immediately take full advantage of it with the rook and queen. This far outweighs the weakness of doubled pawns, which is generally overrated by novices. White is clearly better after 10. Nc3 b4? 11. Ne4 Nxe4 12. dxe4 ... 13. Rd1.

Ne4 creates a weak pawn on e4, which is attacked by the black bishop. It also blocks in your fianchetted bishop. After Rd1... what are you attacking? Black can easily trade off the rook with Qc7 Rd8 and then move the knight.

Black could even play Be7, O-O, Qc3, Rd8

Black doesn't have to play b4 immediately anyway. The knight on c3 is not threatening anything. d4 would be a pointless push because black doesn't need to take with the c pawn. Black could even play Rc8 after d4.