The only problem I foresee is that it will scare the fuck out of Rassah when so much money starts showing up on the books.
I deal with tens of millions of dollars every day at my job, and sign off on checks for hundreds of thousands of dollars, so it's all just numbers to me at this point.
My humorous remark was in reference to something I guess I misinterpreted/misread/misremembered. Upon hunting
that something you penned in this thread last year, the closest post I found doesn't now ring true, therefore ignore my rambling.
Now onto addressing giszmo's post:
(scroll up a couple posts to view it in proper context)Oh, well, sort of. I just don't quite agree with it. I would prefer to see a rather short term goal at which point you, Rassah and all the BTC100 can call it a win and focus on other projects. I consider BTC100 slightly inefficient for all the money spent. I mean I also spent 1BTC towards BUND Berlin but BUND Berlin as the 5th(?) organization to receive $1300? I mean with that amount of money you could do a lot more good for BTC and I would be sad seeing the same amount of money goingt to BUND Munich, BUND Hannover, BUND Köln, etc. We should focus on more valuable multipliers. In this class off NPOs there is literally millions of organizations in the world.
Bund was the third NPO and the only one that received $1,300 USD. The first two were
GBSI and
kenija2012, both receiving less than that amount due to the exchange rate at the time.
You are correct that it would not be prudent for
Bitcoin 100 to give BUND Munich, BUND Hannover or BUND Köln the same consideration.
$1,300 USD could possibly be put to better use short term, but drawing a correlation between this and CoinLab overpaying for a goat with their current donation model, both of our entities needed to start somewhere while Bitcoin is still at its nascent stage of development while building mind share.
That said, let's consider it a win at 10 NPOs using the current structure, and maxing the subsequent donations at $1,000 USD, unless some NPO currently being courted comes forward, then the entire
BTC100 will be honored. With this schedule, at the end of funding the finale NPO, the balance at
Bitcoin 100 will be zero (0), albeit micro fund drives will still be needed as the remaining NPOs manifest themselves.
By no means will Bitcoin 100's work would have been done in vain, for its achievements will be used to jump-start a newly named entity, one of which will be registered as a 501c(3). The main reason for a name change is that incorporating the word Bitcoin into the name of an entity designed purposely as a charitable organization seems counter-productive. We don't see a PayPal Charity, Dollar Charity, Dwollar Charity, etc., but if we did, such entities wouldn't pass the smell test in the real world, although they may do okay as micro-niches. As it stands now,
Bitcoin 100 falls into said category, and a grander charitable organization to further the Bitcoin ideal is warranted.
At 53 (minus 60+ days), I'm dedicating the rest of my life toward such a endeavor. At 10,000 posts (minus 97), it's time to get down to business regarding Bitcoin. That said, I'm going to PM a select few to get their opinions on a name I have in mind, starting with Josh at BFL. I would trust that done of them would register the valuable (I believe) domain name during the opinion seeking stage. The following are names I will be sending a PM to, with the possibility of a few others:
Josh at BFL
Rassah
Roger Ver
Tony at BitPay
Edd
Theymos and some of his Motley Crew mods.
Yankee
Those at The Bitcoin Foundation
(heck with the list, for you get the idea, and I'll use the
Bitcoin 100 list of members for further consideration)
To be clear, nothing is currently changing at
Bitcoin 100, and the continuing support is still needed. In essence, we would only be looking at a name change and, more importantly, how this viable charitable organization will better humanity through the use of Bitcoin.
~Bruno K~
