Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53BAC001E for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:48:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9142A4010F for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:48:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xo4NF7oiMDNR for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:48:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 01:09:56 by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from 4.mo548.mail-out.ovh.net (4.mo548.mail-out.ovh.net [188.165.42.229]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95106400F3 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:48:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mxplan6.mail.ovh.net (unknown [10.109.138.84]) by mo548.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DBB5209C2; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:21:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from peersm.com (37.59.142.104) by DAG6EX1.mxp6.local (172.16.2.51) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.18; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:21:42 +0100 Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-104R005bfe13370-1f5c-4094-b99d-12075011879a, 3A1C7349D80F2434CA8BC385CDA32872B2645AFB) smtp.auth=aymeric@peersm.com X-OVh-ClientIp: 92.184.100.97 To: jack , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Prayank References: From: Aymeric Vitte Message-ID: Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:21:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [37.59.142.104] X-ClientProxiedBy: DAG4EX2.mxp6.local (172.16.2.32) To DAG6EX1.mxp6.local (172.16.2.51) X-Ovh-Tracer-GUID: 506566d8-9d01-497a-805c-b52f81fbbff7 X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 8711932004313621472 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrtdehgdehvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjpdevjffgvefmvefgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfhisehtqhertddtfeehnecuhfhrohhmpeethihmvghrihgtucggihhtthgvuceorgihmhgvrhhitgesphgvvghrshhmrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeuffdvudeivdehtdfhfedtjeduvdetfeeukeehffduieeggedvteeiuedtieefteenucffohhmrghinheplhhinhhugihfohhunhgurghtihhonhdrohhrghenucfkpheptddrtddrtddrtddpfeejrdehledrudegvddruddtgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhhvghlohepmhigphhlrghniedrmhgrihhlrdhovhhhrdhnvghtpdhinhgvtheptddrtddrtddrtddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrhihmvghrihgtsehpvggvrhhsmhdrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepuddprhgtphhtthhopehjrggtkhesshhquhgrrhgvuhhprdgtohhm X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:22:17 +0000 Cc: 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 15:48:20 -0000 (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 =E0 19:20, jack via bitcoin-dev a =E9crit : > 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 F= und' can be confusing or misleading for newbies. There is nothing officia= l in Bitcoin however people believe things written in news articles and s= ome 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 ha= d 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 chose= n, 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