Update Article II (Purpose): Anonymity and Funding

[ABISprotocol]

This pull request is responsive to issue #19 ("Anonymity and Funding"). It is expressly written to minimize change to the Bylaws, provides an additional emphasis on anonymity that was not previously present, while still ensuring that bitcoin in its current, non-anonymous form is expressly supported in the Purpose section. Where the Corporation "shall promote and protect" aspects of bitcoin use (and use of "such systems,") "all derivative uses of blockchain data" are added to emphasize that the Corporation shall promote and protect the many uses of bitcoin. Additionally, a reference to "financial privacy" is replaced with "user-defined privacy," emphasizing the vital role of individual choice which is present in the Bylaws.

[pmlaw]

Thx @ABISprotocol I will try to get this on the agenda for our Board meeting Monday.

[mdhaze]

Not having seen it in the minutes from the Board recently produced, I have a request. I'd like to see who votes yea and nay on all pull requests. Without that sort of information, how would one know whether to vote someone out or in?

[pmlaw]

The Board discussed this proposal but held off on voting until the next Board meeting so that it has time to deliberate. There were no serious objections raised at first glance.

[ABISprotocol]

@pmlaw I look forward to seeing the result of the final vote here.

[ABISprotocol]

For the interested, I've included a statement here from @BraveTheWorld. which includes many voices, all declaring bitcoin's independence from institutions and various powers-that-be.

[mdhaze]

I like that statement and support the ideas projected therein.

[ABISprotocol]

@BruceFenton As a brief inquiry, when might this be scheduled for a formal up / down vote at the Board?

[BruceFenton]

Hi, reading back through I'm not entirely clear on what vote you are requesting. Could you place it into the format of exactly the question for the board to vote on? I can submit for this meeting and it will be voted on by the next meeting at the latest.

[vessenes]

@BruceFenton My memory of this chain of discussion is that there was a fairly lengthy conversation hammering out some of the reasoning and verbiage elsewhere.

In fact, yes, the discussion is here: #19.

I had proposed some funding for ZeroCoin / DarkCoin through the technology grant program, and, (without re-reading the entire thread, so my memory may be at fault here), this and related proposals raised a question which was fairly common at the time -- to wit, what does the Foundation do as a policy matter when it comes to supporting alt-coins, more private payment possibilities, and so on.

Does it support proposals which increase privacy for Bitcoin or as experiments? Or, to use @pmlaw's term, user-defined privacy? And if so, what impact does / did that have on finance and policy direction. With the Foundations reduced budget, I think some of these questions are probably academic, but they are important ones if the Foundation plans to have policy and technology impact.

[ABISprotocol]

@BruceFenton Hello, upon reflection of recent comments above by @vessenes, I would submit that this matter is not simply academic, though I do concur with @vessenes that the issues raised by my pull request are important if the Foundation plans to have policy impact. Additionally, given the direction we have seen states moving ( and simply considering the length of time that this pull request has been waiting for action, following the lengthy discussion in issue #19 ), it is high time for an up or down vote on this pull request ( #23 ).

You had requested if I could "place it into the format of exactly the question for the board to vote on" ~ yes, that format can be found here:

ABISprotocol@f889054

When you click on the link above you can see a Executive Summary of the pull request along with the pull request itself (which shows the proposed deleted section and red, and the section which would replace the deleted section in green).

Thank you for considering that this pull request be submitted for the coming meeting and with the potential for it to be voted on at the next meeting as you have suggested.