From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15ED0C001E for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:18:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6F983E83 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:18:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.848 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E0suDvhE3PhD for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:18:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-ua1-x92b.google.com (mail-ua1-x92b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92b]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A7A683E68 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:18:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua1-x92b.google.com with SMTP id o1so18381877uap.4 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:18:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JqnyJet4hopo3pc+JVyWOoxI1lS+RZ3sck0zCNG0q8s=; b=P+xpcsCPDdxY948y1T17/idzhhRndrxmZpN9YrkoiXwPC20nbSblMwKOFl5mW6tRF1 eKeIg4BUVgAU/wZHcyQbieUDP/0JsshpgUl5D1+J1YPLG1tUXq5UHMbddMNxH+1LcLMb jxG6eojnnkj1LOJGOfNeZqjyX0jKfesp8KjYQxuKhIYQr/raGsGDDDlRSx/ZBIRc8Azk ckyRCvjNc6vpbPrc74vrFGxHsXKezzEEC5A02K6SyweI9Uv7O9vqy4qWcC9pec+rd/+c 4IB3H3TYOKjHHsWlwMBIFmWNi/s3uCkEZiWmarzwT5SfJ3y8bQXcdFIV5n2L8FuN+soH JCig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JqnyJet4hopo3pc+JVyWOoxI1lS+RZ3sck0zCNG0q8s=; b=v0R0NiVsMnaVGo3+yhf3inKZKHDElIMGY+TGIC7KAG5+CbGhwYF121DeYj7fREaxd3 n5VRIdmCG0qfTSfzmP0YYcc1HAgLjWWyDRHG/2VkRnH7DK2B9rLHnayTCwvWy897B7bf vGSRv7+CKce2F4wiz+SRWfF+uhzxkNfGSPP2pRM7sFzPCAckKFAPj7RmJYDedAOkTpCj SQL4zaPA+Jx6yEh52KeaAzUxwAEHF+49QvnK5IHvIUBtFMbwX9gY4nHUBXNszlSDiZuI K4ad9gpt+5IA0ypbiFpsQGJPR539H3/Jq1B5KFwWXiQb7XI9mqrbFqo+XGErntQTGbOp HA4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531K/ZiYRa+zwudi9mkc9hz6frp4R5Au868mUn9X0QUYGv+3wgj+ 56PN+1iphem5HoiTFLTTh8XSWnBkJCEKf5+0J58= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxqyIxXPegDefWhcDcRbGn5G1Z4d1y9CXgrBlib2nGaWEAicYmw04SpzGJHvg3szGePI61LYu5UldtRninnzvU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:a51:: with SMTP id i17mr4652852vss.2.1642184331865; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:18:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: qmccormick13 Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 19:18:40 +0100 Message-ID: To: Aymeric Vitte , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c1ba1d05d58ed59c" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:24:44 +0000 Cc: Prayank , info@bitcoindefensefund.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:18:54 -0000 --000000000000c1ba1d05d58ed59c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I very much hope the fund will not finance lawsuits irrelevant to bitcoin. On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:23 PM Aymeric Vitte via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > (P2P?) Electronic Cash (Defense?) Fund or Electronic Cash Foundation ? > More neutral, potentially covering others than Bitcoin, mimicking a bit > EFF (even if as stated US is not the only target), referring to > Satoshi's paper where everything started > > Maybe I am not up to date but it would be good to know what are the > current procedures with the Tulip thing > > Aymeric > > > Le 13/01/2022 =C3=A0 19:20, jack via bitcoin-dev a =C3=A9crit : > > Hi Prayank, > > > >> On 13 Jan 2022, at 10:13, Prayank wrote: > >> I had few suggestions and feel free to ignore them if they do not make > sense: > >> > >> 1.Name of this fund could be anything and 'The Bitcoin Legal Defense > Fund' can be confusing or misleading for newbies. There is nothing offici= al > in Bitcoin however people believe things written in news articles and som= e > of them might consider it as an official bitcoin legal fund. > > Excellent point. Will come up with a better name. > > > >> 2.It would be better if people involved in such important funds do not > comment/influence soft fork related discussions. Example: Alex Morcos had > some opinions about activation mechanism during Taproot soft fork IIRC. > > Yes. Will think through this and board operating principles we can shar= e > publicly, which would probably include criteria for how cases are chosen, > to protect against this board and fund influencing direction. > > > > Open to ideas and suggestions on all. > > > > jack > > _______________________________________________ > > bitcoin-dev mailing list > > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --000000000000c1ba1d05d58ed59c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I very much hope the fund will not finance lawsuits irrele= vant to bitcoin.

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:23 PM Aymeric Vitte via bitc= oin-dev <bitcoi= n-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
(P2P?) Electronic Cash (Defense?) Fund or = Electronic Cash Foundation ?
More neutral, potentially covering others than Bitcoin, mimicking a bit
EFF (even if as stated US is not the only target), referring to
Satoshi's paper where everything started

Maybe I am not up to date but it would be good to know what are the
current procedures with the Tulip thing

Aymeric


Le 13/01/2022 =C3=A0 19:20, jack via bitcoin-dev a =C3=A9crit :
> Hi Prayank,
>
>> On 13 Jan 2022, at 10:13, Prayank <prayank@tutanota.de> wrote:
>> I had few suggestions and feel free to ignore them if they do not = make sense:
>>
>> 1.Name of this fund could be anything and 'The Bitcoin Legal D= efense Fund' can be confusing or misleading for newbies. There is nothi= ng official in Bitcoin however people believe things written in news articl= es and some of them might consider it as an official bitcoin legal fund. > Excellent point. Will come up with a better name.
>
>> 2.It would be better if people involved in such important funds do= not comment/influence soft fork related discussions. Example: Alex Morcos = had some opinions about activation mechanism during Taproot soft fork IIRC.=
> Yes. Will think through this and board operating principles we can sha= re publicly, which would probably include criteria for how cases are chosen= , to protect against this board and fund influencing direction.
>
> Open to ideas and suggestions on all.
>
> jack
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--000000000000c1ba1d05d58ed59c--