Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote It's hard to credit that people are still pushing for the WMF to accept Bitcoin payments after the worlds major venue for trading them, the Magic: The Gathering Online Exchange, crashed and disappeared $500m. Obviously not a safe and secure payment modality right now, where is the rush to jump into something so risky? The risk her was trusting a centralized place with being an escrow for your money though, not Bitcoin itself. -- Daniel Zahn dz...@wikimedia.org Operations Engineer ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On 15 March 2014 13:31, Daniel Zahn dz...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote It's hard to credit that people are still pushing for the WMF to accept Bitcoin payments after the worlds major venue for trading them, the Magic: The Gathering Online Exchange, crashed and disappeared $500m. Obviously not a safe and secure payment modality right now, where is the rush to jump into something so risky? The risk her was trusting a centralized place with being an escrow for your money though, not Bitcoin itself. Functionally, a currency is its social structures and how it flows - not just the objects deemed currency themselves. It's not money unless it flows, and Bitcoin flows through exchanges that range from laughably inept to criminal. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating system. At the end of it all, after a successful donation has been made, an internal donation message should be queued. Happily, examples of all the things I just mentioned already exist in other gateway adapter objects; New gateways are rarely so unusual that we haven't nearly done it before. * Payments Listener[2]: Most payment gateways worth even brief consideration, have an optional near-realtime notification system. This system tells us when we receive new payments, and existing payments change status (cancels, refunds, chargebacks). We would need to create a listener to receive realtime payment updates, process them securely, and queue donation messages when appropriate. Though a realtime message listener is usually not strictly required in order to get paid through a new gateway integration, I have recently decided to require them wherever possible. * Nightly reconciliation / auditing[3]: Every payment gateway we integrate with provides a daily downloadable list of all the transactions we should have on record. So, a job needs to be created that will download the daily file and chew through our records to make sure we have all the relevant data, and rebuild anything we may have missed. This job needs to be set up to run daily. * Queue consumer module for civicrm integration[4]: The donations queue consumer will need to be modified, to accept and correctly process donation messages from the new gateway, in a way that is consistent with our
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Jimmy's already noted this is WRONG, but the erroneous Telegraph story reads: Wikipedia charity begins accepting Bitcoin donations after co-founder Jimmy Wales set up a personal account to play around with digital currency and was swamped with cash http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html *Jimmy Wales* @jimmy_wales https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales 7mhttps://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/443031310207311872 Yo, @Telegraph https://twitter.com/Telegraph, this story is wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wik ipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html ... http://t.co/fM3CTBzRsE No decision has been made for Wikipedia to accept BTC! On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.netwrote: Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating system. At the end of it all, after a successful donation has been made, an internal donation message should be queued. Happily, examples of all the things I just mentioned already exist in other gateway adapter objects; New gateways are rarely so unusual that we haven't nearly done it before. * Payments Listener[2]: Most payment gateways worth even brief consideration, have an optional near-realtime notification system. This system tells us when we receive new payments, and existing payments
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
sarcasm Wow, we've made an entire 1.6k out of bitcoin? This totally seems like the highest-value way to spend our time! Thanks, Bitcoin! I'm sure that the value of these items won't wildly vary in short spaces of time based on things like, oh, your propensity to have banking neophytes host your exchanges and end up shut down. /sarcasm On 10 March 2014 07:39, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: Jimmy's already noted this is WRONG, but the erroneous Telegraph story reads: Wikipedia charity begins accepting Bitcoin donations after co-founder Jimmy Wales set up a personal account to play around with digital currency and was swamped with cash http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html *Jimmy Wales* @jimmy_wales https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales 7mhttps://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/443031310207311872 Yo, @Telegraph https://twitter.com/Telegraph, this story is wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wik ipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html ... http://t.co/fM3CTBzRsE No decision has been made for Wikipedia to accept BTC! On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.net wrote: Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Charles Gregory, 10/03/2014 14:26: On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. What's the board of directors? Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: sarcasm Wow, we've made an entire 1.6k out of bitcoin? This totally seems like the highest-value way to spend our time! Thanks, Bitcoin! I'm sure that the value of these items won't wildly vary in short spaces of time based on things like, oh, your propensity to have banking neophytes host your exchanges and end up shut down. /sarcasm Sounds like an interesting headache for Jimmy's tax accountant! Income tax implications of getting donations in bitcoins, cashing them out and donating them to a tax exempt organization... might be complicated. It's hard to credit that people are still pushing for the WMF to accept Bitcoin payments after the worlds major venue for trading them, the Magic: The Gathering Online Exchange, crashed and disappeared $500m. Obviously not a safe and secure payment modality right now, where is the rush to jump into something so risky? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues can be addressed with reasonable effort. The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of $30K at current (insanely high) exchange rates. But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative bubble, and WMF should remain neutral on the utility of Bitcoin. At this point though, whatever WMF does or doesn't do is just a small drop in the bucket of the overall Bitcoin mania, so I'm personally fine with a decision being made on pragmatic grounds alone. My own view is that Bitcoin has significant design flaws (built-in economic inequality, most rational actors will hoard rather than spend, doubtful long-term scalability, questionable value as an actual currency due to crazy volatility, tendency to centralize power with miners, rampant security attacks against BTC holders, etc.), but as long as no more severe technical flaws are discovered/exploited, at least some value will likely attach to BTC for some time to come, even if it's dramatically less than the current exchange rate. With that said, I fully defer to our fundraising team on this since it's a decision that should be made purely on cost/benefit grounds, perhaps by also comparing with other currencies that see relatively little use. The one unambiguous positive that I see coming out of Bitcoin mania is a renewed interest in peer-to-peer networks; the last time that happened was about 12 years ago, and it resulted in technologies like BitTorrent, Tor, various file sharing networks and many others being developed. Experimenting is, overall, a good thing, and no matter how this one plays out (and how exhausting a topic it can be given the idiocy of coverage about it), I'm optimistic that we will see positive ripple effects for the free culture movement. Erik [1] https://blockchain.info/address/1Archive1n2C579dMsAu3iC6tWzuQJz8dN -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Thanks Erik for a well written overview. Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating specifically to have this built, or we could obtain pledges to donate to see if the threshold can be reached. On Jan 9, 2014 9:06 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues can be addressed with reasonable effort. The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of $30K at current (insanely high) exchange rates. But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative bubble, and WMF should remain neutral on the utility of Bitcoin. At this point though, whatever WMF does or doesn't do is just a small drop in the bucket of the overall Bitcoin mania, so I'm personally fine with a decision being made on pragmatic grounds alone. My own view is that Bitcoin has significant design flaws (built-in economic inequality, most rational actors will hoard rather than spend, doubtful long-term scalability, questionable value as an actual currency due to crazy volatility, tendency to centralize power with miners, rampant security attacks against BTC holders, etc.), but as long as no more severe technical flaws are discovered/exploited, at least some value will likely attach to BTC for some time to come, even if it's dramatically less than the current exchange rate. With that said, I fully defer to our fundraising team on this since it's a decision that should be made purely on cost/benefit grounds, perhaps by also comparing with other currencies that see relatively little use. The one unambiguous positive that I see coming out of Bitcoin mania is a renewed interest in peer-to-peer networks; the last time that happened was about 12 years ago, and it resulted in technologies like BitTorrent, Tor, various file sharing networks and many others being developed. Experimenting is, overall, a good thing, and no matter how this one plays out (and how exhausting a topic it can be given the idiocy of coverage about it), I'm optimistic that we will see positive ripple effects for the free culture movement. Erik [1] https://blockchain.info/address/1Archive1n2C579dMsAu3iC6tWzuQJz8dN -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a year[3]. Or, in the case that it is not an immediate payoff, if it is strategically relevant for the future of our income stream (think our recent forays into mobile). It's also worth stating that at this time we only use four gateways (we get the hundreds of currencies through gateways that serve multiple methods and countries.) It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review, donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation and legal review.) In addition, every gateway incurs additional maintenance, auditing, and troubleshooting costs on an ongoing basis. Because of these costs, we have only four gateways (Adyen, Amazon, GlobalCollect, and PayPal); with active plans to add another (already determined) gateway this year for common methods and regions we don't already serve. Formally the dept has not conducted a cost/benefit analysis of accepting bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency. Nor have we asked the legal dept to look into it from a compliance point of view. I have been attempting to gather data for an informal blog post on the topic and I have found no indication that if we were to conduct such a study formally that it would come out positively. I will state again the contents of our FAQ: We do, however, strive to provide as many methods of donating as possible and continue to monitor Bitcoin with interest and may revisit this position should circumstances change. I would encourage those who are put off by the Wikimedia Foundation's non acceptance of cryptocurrency donations to consider alternative methods of donation and promoting of free knowledge; namely by becoming active editors. [1] personal hat The bitcoin community should be aware that their persistent and often times aggressive, rude, and vulgar messaging towards me and my fellow coworkers is not appreciated; nor does it help their cause. If the goals of the cryptocurrency movement include shedding the world of fiscal dictators, centralized control, and autocracy; then perhaps it is time for some introspection. From my standpoint the actions of the movement (or at least the actions of a significant number who are public on the internet that I have read) are scarily similar to those whom the moment stands to replace. /personal hat [2] A payments gateway can be simply thought of as a collection of APIs, coupled into DonationInterface, our backend CRM, and financial software, that can accept payments and remit them in an auditable way to the Wikimedia Foundation in one of our working currencies. [3] This number isn't set in stone and should not be considered a formal estimate, but consider that the Wikimedia Foundation's yearly budget is ~$50M. As fundraisers ideally we want to focus effort on things that can provide a significant portion of that. We also do not wish to spend money on things that would increase our useful spending to overhead spending ratio. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 7:05 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Erik for a well written overview. Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating specifically to have this built, or we could obtain pledges to donate to see if the threshold can be reached. On Jan 9, 2014 9:06 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues can be addressed with reasonable effort. The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of $30K at current (insanely high) exchange rates. But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Matthew Walker mwal...@wikimedia.org wrote: It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review, donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation and legal review.) That makes perfect sense, Matt. It's easy to forget that because BTC is so novel, none of the existing payment gateways we have implemented support it, so comparing to existing currencies is really misleading. So you're left with either the DIY approach the Internet Archive is taking [1], or the technical effort of properly integrating something like Bitpay. The bitcoin community should be aware that their persistent and often times aggressive, rude, and vulgar messaging towards me and my fellow coworkers is not appreciated; Indeed. Unfortunately the incentive structure of Bitcoin's bubble economy turns ordinary people into obnoxious hucksters. Erik [1] Srsly! Just one example: http://blog.archive.org/2013/03/05/bitcoin-to-cash-converter-box/ -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:17 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: As Peter just said, there is no risk if WMF converts bitcoin donations to USD immediately. Uh... except that because Bitcoin is not a regulated currency, it's value has the potential to fluctuate wildly, and seems to have done so since it attracts speculators of all crazy sorts. Seems pretty fuckin risky to me. Who's to say if the work involved in accepting bitcoins, monitoring transactions, converting them, etc. will be worth the actual donations we receive in bitcoin? Developing and maintaining payments systems doesn't come for free. Fundraising and finance staff at WMF work extremely hard to keep these systems running smoothly, and I for one don't think it's worth adding yet another potential system to build/maintain just to placate bitcoin devotees who want us to help promote their libertarian fantasy project. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Andrew Bogott wrote: So, we have a problem, and then we have an already-implemented solution... what is left for anyone to do but dust off their hands and go to lunch? If Bitpay has already solved the exact problem that we're discussion, why would the foundation spend a nickel duplicating their work? There are, I believe, several problem with that solution: (1) Bitpay seems to have created that merchant account without ever discussing this with the Foundation, (2) the account is not owned by the Foundation, and the Foundation does not have any influence over it at the moment, (3) given choice, the Foundation might have decided to use the services of their competitor (for whatever reasons). That's just off the top of my head, but I'm sure other people (not to mention Foundation lawyers!) can think of other things. Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: Andrew Bogott wrote: So, we have a problem, and then we have an already-implemented solution... what is left for anyone to do but dust off their hands and go to lunch? If Bitpay has already solved the exact problem that we're discussion, why would the foundation spend a nickel duplicating their work? There are, I believe, several problem with that solution: (1) Bitpay seems to have created that merchant account without ever discussing this with the Foundation, (2) the account is not owned by the Foundation, and the Foundation does not have any influence over it at the moment, (3) given choice, the Foundation might have decided to use the services of their competitor (for whatever reasons). Re: http://blog.bitpay.com/2012/11/donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin.html I'm not sure I'm following all of this correctly. I thought the idea was that BitPay would exchange Bitcoins for USDs and then donate the USDs to the Wikimedia Foundation. Why would that require the Wikimedia Foundation being in control of whatever account is used to transfer the funds? Isn't the merchant account simply a means of transferring USDs? I'm lost. :-( I think Andrew makes a compelling argument, though it's difficult to be sure when the implementation details are not entirely clear. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Other forms of money we do not currently accept include gold coins, Yap money, Tesco Clubcard Points, cowrie shells and cattle. We could accept any of them in theory. Though if anyone wants to donate a herd of cattle to Wikimedia UK please could they contact the office in advance. Chris On 12 Dec 2013 03:31, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 12/12/13 02:54, Nathan wrote: Bitcoin isn't native currency for anyone, and anyone who wishes to make a Bitcoin donation could certainly do so using a more standard currency. Well, this article from a year ago argues that bitcoin is safer for donors than donating national currency: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/06/29/wikipedia-accepts-enemies-of-the-internet-currencies/ But just don’t try to donate safely in bitcoin — it’s not accepted. [...] Accepting anonymous bitcoin in addition to political currencies can be a way of declaring that freedom of speech still does matter. I would think that if anonymity is the main concern, a transaction system with a public log of all transactions would not be the best choice. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity The obvious time-tested choice for anonymous payment is, of course, cash. Many charities do accept cash donations. Cash could be donated to the local chapter by dropping it into a donation box, then it could be either spent on local programs or forwarded to WMF. -- Tim Starling ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 12/12/13 02:54, Nathan wrote: Bitcoin isn't native currency for anyone, and anyone who wishes to make a Bitcoin donation could certainly do so using a more standard currency. I would think that if anonymity is the main concern, a transaction system with a public log of all transactions would not be the best choice. I guess we're pretty lost in several different agendas and purposes. Bitcoin is clearly controversial in the sense that due to its anon and non-government-controlled nature it is used in ways traditional money was neither planned nor accepted, and its very existence is a fight against control, trail tracking and other various (legal and illegal) means of invading privacy of honest people and criminals both. I observe quite different reasons people would like to have BC accepted. I guess for the most part it's about support freedom, fight against governmental control and fight against invasion of privacy. People make point to use BC instead of govt money to donate thus pulling in organisations to support monetary freedom (of their opinion, at least). In this aspect, and I guess that's the main aspect, Wikipedia should support that freedom. In this aspect, however, it is clear that supporting this is dangerous since it's an open fight against governmental control, and governments are sensitive abvout losing their hard-collected rights. It is also a political move in that sense, and aven it's not for any given political force should not be taken lightly. Other aspect is where anonimity is the main reason, where people or organisations risk by donating an US organisation or to Wikipedia, The Guardian of Free Information in general. Cash drop is obviously not the solution for a Chinese or Russian citizen, and honestly we're quite out of alternatives here. (Please do not get into debates about why anyone would strongly prefer to stay anonymous, that is not the point, thank you.) Another aspect would be technical: why not? There are steps and resources required to process bitcoin, especially strong mphasis about informational security since BC is quite prone to electronic theft. However these are not impossible, not even hard steps, and WMF is absolutely capable to create the infrastructure to accept BC safely. I see no real problem here. (And even if it requires work from accountants and tax-professionals and lawyers we do have the resources to archieve that easily. We might even set example for smaller NGOs about how to do that legally; they may not have the resources to reach a working solution.) Again a different aspect is volatility or unstable exchange rates, some people argue that BC is not a stable currency. Ackowledging the truth in that I believe it is irrelevant: if people keep their money in BC that's their worry, if they donate $100 worth of BC which will be exachanged to $50 next week it is still $50 donation for us. We do not plan to keep our assets in BC, and even if we would keep BC donations in BC (why not) there's nothing to lose; if it loses 90% of its worth due to whatever happening then that's it, might just happen to a real currency either. We cannot lose more than the donations in BC anyway. A few people start something I usually would call trolling in different context ( :-) ) which debates on why bitcoin and why not johndoecoin or billygold or whatever. First because this topic is about BC, let the whatever scheme debate run elsewhere (and you may work to have BC accepted as a basis for your esoteric semicurrency LATER). Second because BC market penetration is not comparable, people are using it, it is hard to deny, and there are stable exchanges giving you real money for it, the demand is much higher than for susiecoins or whatever. Out of the topics above the only risk I see is the political/anti-government/anti-control/free-speech aspects, and these are not easy problems indeed. But I do not believe people arguing the other aspects have much to debate on. Seems you're running in circles, pulling up the same non-reasoning over and over. For the record I do not plan to donate in BC, neither do I mine it. I just tend to support more freedom in general. g ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Jake Orlowitz jorlow...@gmail.com wrote: * Our peers like EFF, and Internet archive accept it To be totally honest, I think this is moot. Support for bitcoin among these two organizations has hardly been a ringing endorsement. In the past, EFF has rejected it for very practical reasons I think still apply.[1] As for Internet Archive, I was literally in the room when their fundraising staff announced they started accepting bitcoin, and they actually said they didn't really understand what it was, other than people requested they accept it. In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. 1. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/eff-and-bitcoin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Dec 13, 2013 5:55 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Jake Orlowitz jorlow...@gmail.com wrote: * Our peers like EFF, and Internet archive accept it To be totally honest, I think this is moot. Support for bitcoin among these two organizations has hardly been a ringing endorsement. In the past, EFF has rejected it for very practical reasons I think still apply.[1] As for Internet Archive, I was literally in the room when their fundraising staff announced they started accepting bitcoin, and they actually said they didn't really understand what it was, other than people requested they accept it. In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. As Peter just said, there is no risk if WMF converts bitcoin donations to USD immediately. -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent I do not plan to get into a perpetual debate just wanted to point out that there is no playing and buying and risky investment involved. Nobody asked WMF to buy BC or to convert existing assets to BC. All the risk has been taken by the donors (whether they donate $100 or $0), WMF *finiancially* risks exactly nothing (provided that we assume people who want to donate in BC would not use goventment money anyway, which seems logical to me). Peter ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On 10 December 2013 23:13, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 11/12/13 06:58, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: I'm sure those reading this list can Google the topic themselves, so I won't link to the many angry discussion that are taking place on the interwebs right now; I tried Googling, including news and blog searches, and couldn't work out what you are talking about. Maybe you should provide links. tl;dr Bitcoin fans really, really want Wikimedia to accept Bitcoin donations; Wikimedia is not so interested, but haven't sent a big Monty Python-style trademark foot down on Bitpay as yet. Nobody else is very aware. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
[completely personal opinion] To be totally, completely, honest I don't really want us to collect it... and at this point it's mostly for personal reasons. First off this isn't really a huge new push to get us to accept bitcoin, they have been doing this ever 5-6 months in an organized fashion (frequently, but probably not always, started by some of the big bitcoin bloggers or payment providers) since at least 2010 when I was involved in the fundraiser generally trying to shame us and force us to accept it. The pushes generally include asking everyone to send fundraising emails and writing as many articles about it as possible. Every time it happens people say that they are getting angry and it's a thing. This is actually a relatively minor burst of activity compared to the past couple years though the fact that it is happening is to be expected given the fundraiser push for the end of the year and the publicity that brings. Part of me wants to say that it just isn't worth the effort. While I'm not in the FR team anymore so things may have changed the effort to integrate a new payment system is not tiny because it's actually very important for us to have automatic tracking into our donation system etc. We used to have multiple random payment e-wallet/payment methods spread out because people had created different accounts and they were insanely difficult to keep track of. That said while I don't think the effort involved here is tiny/insubstantial the real reason I don't want to do it is because, at this point, it's seemed more and more like people wanted us to accept bitcoin more as a political statement then anything else. That is not our job, that is not our role, and I do not appreciate someone attempting to use us to make themselves look more mainstream and accepted. During the 2011 fundraiser the campaign focused on the fact that we accepted 'currencies of anti internet countries' but wouldn't accept bitcoins. We had integrated an enormous amount of different currencies (though each individual one was not much work it was really just the original integration that took forever). The articles and comments at the time seemed very clearly to me to try and imply that we should not be accepting these currencies (making it much harder for users in those countries to give) because they were 'anti internet' and we should accept bitcoin because it was 'pro internet'. I'm sorry, that's just not how we should be making decisions. The articles since then have not seemed any different (and have, perhaps, seemed even more angry) every time I see stories asking us, or anyone for that matter, to accept bitcoin it's always couched in the idea that oh X and Y accept it so why won't YOU! and it is very clear that if we start accepting it every story will include some variation of Wikipedia accepts it and therefore how can you say it isn't mainstream!. Very few (i'm sure they exist, but I haven't found them) of the articles talk about how much money the non profits or companies are making, they are all about trying to make a point and prove that we should accept bitcoin because... 'freedom'.. That isn't our job and, again, I don't like people who seem to be out to use our name for their gain. Sorry for the bit of a ramble here :-/ at this point whenever I see another one of these pushes I want to accept bitcoin less and I respect the bitcoin community a bit less. It's a great idea (with some flaws, but a great idea none the less) but...this is not how to make it a respectable currency... it's how to make it look like a niche toy beloved by people trying to push an agenda :-/ James On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:20 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 December 2013 23:13, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 11/12/13 06:58, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: I'm sure those reading this list can Google the topic themselves, so I won't link to the many angry discussion that are taking place on the interwebs right now; I tried Googling, including news and blog searches, and couldn't work out what you are talking about. Maybe you should provide links. tl;dr Bitcoin fans really, really want Wikimedia to accept Bitcoin donations; Wikimedia is not so interested, but haven't sent a big Monty Python-style trademark foot down on Bitpay as yet. Nobody else is very aware. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
I demand that the Wikimedia Foundation start accepting the following: Litecoin Namecoin PPCoin Feathercoin Craftcoin Quarkcoin Freicoin Devcoin Terracoin BBQCoin Netcoin Actually, scrap that, I've got an even better Ponzi scheme - sorry, cryptocurrency: TomCoin. And, best of all, if you start taking TomCoins I'll be happy to give you a million of them. No, wait, how about a billion? -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
It's *completely* wrong to call these things Ponzi schemes. *Technically*, they're pump-and-dumps. - d. On 11 Dec 2013 10:59, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: I demand that the Wikimedia Foundation start accepting the following: Litecoin Namecoin PPCoin Feathercoin Craftcoin Quarkcoin Freicoin Devcoin Terracoin BBQCoin Netcoin Actually, scrap that, I've got an even better Ponzi scheme - sorry, cryptocurrency: TomCoin. And, best of all, if you start taking TomCoins I'll be happy to give you a million of them. No, wait, how about a billion? -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
James Alexander wrote: That said while I don't think the effort involved here is tiny/insubstantial the real reason I don't want to do it is because, at this point, it's seemed more and more like people wanted us to accept bitcoin more as a political statement then anything else. That is not our job, that is not our role, and I do not appreciate someone attempting to use us to make themselves look more mainstream and accepted. It's funny, I just had a look at the wikimedia-l archive around January 2012... you know, that time when Wikipedia literally shut itself down as a political statement. The following month, the Wikimedia Foundation established a Community Advocacy department, not to be confused with lobbying, of which you're now a member. I can appreciate the many legitimate reasons to not accept Bitcoin and I'm grateful for your candid thoughts on the matter, but the idea that you, of all people, would try to claim that it might (gasp!) insert politics into Wikipedia is simply disrespectful to history and reality. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:37 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Has there been any discussion about simply accepting Bitcoins but not exchanging them? snip I don't have a strong opinion on whether WMF should or should not accept Bitcoin donations. However, even if we were to accept them, I don't believe we should be collecting them. As I believe is already the case with most foreign currency donations, Bitcoins (if accepted) should be exchanged for dollars shortly after being received. Whatever else Bitcoins might be, they are certainly subject to rapid variations in market prices and considerable uncertainty regarding the future regulatory environment. As such, as an investment, they would have to be classed as highly speculative. Some people have made a lot of money off of Bitcoins, and some others may yet make a lot more, but there is also the potential to lose a lot of value if regulatory fiats or undiscovered flaws in the Bitcoin system cause their value to plummet. I don't think holding on to high-risk investment vehicles makes sense for a non-profit that aims to make responsible use of people's donations. -Robert Rohde ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: It's funny, I just had a look at the wikimedia-l archive around January 2012... you know, that time when Wikipedia literally shut itself down as a political statement. The following month, the Wikimedia Foundation established a Community Advocacy department, not to be confused with lobbying, of which you're now a member. I can appreciate the many legitimate reasons to not accept Bitcoin and I'm grateful for your candid thoughts on the matter, but the idea that you, of all people, would try to claim that it might (gasp!) insert politics into Wikipedia is simply disrespectful to history and reality. I interpreted James Alexander's statement to mean that it's not our job and not our role to make the particular political statement that Bitcoin's proponents seek. This doesn't mean that it's *never* okay for us to engage in advocacy of a political nature, particularly in response to something potentially threatening a WMF project's very existence. (Whether SOPA and PIPA actually posed a significant threat is debatable, but the action in question stemmed from the belief that they did.) David Levy ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:37 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Has there been any discussion about simply accepting Bitcoins but not exchanging them? snip I don't have a strong opinion on whether WMF should or should not accept Bitcoin donations. However, even if we were to accept them, I don't believe we should be collecting them. As I believe is already the case with most foreign currency donations, Bitcoins (if accepted) should be exchanged for dollars shortly after being received. In my opinon this whole bitcoin debate is framed incorrectly. The question is not if it should be accepted or not, but which parameters make any currency or payment method acceptable. If I had to name a few, I would say: * less than 10% variation against WOCU (or any other currency basket) last fiscal year * at least 10b USD transaction volume last fiscal year I don't have any preference for or against bitcoin either, but I think any payment method should fulfill certain stability requirements. Once bitcoin or any other currency fullfills those requirements (the ones I have mentioned or others), it should be accepted. Cheers, Micru ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:10 AM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinon this whole bitcoin debate is framed incorrectly. The question is not if it should be accepted or not, but which parameters make any currency or payment method acceptable. If I had to name a few, I would say: * less than 10% variation against WOCU (or any other currency basket) last fiscal year * at least 10b USD transaction volume last fiscal year I don't have any preference for or against bitcoin either, but I think any payment method should fulfill certain stability requirements. Once bitcoin or any other currency fullfills those requirements (the ones I have mentioned or others), it should be accepted. Cheers, Micru It'd be simpler to state that the major factor in accepting a new payment type is enabling donors who otherwise might not be able to donate. Adding a currency with a small constituency might make sense, even if the currency is unstable, if it permits donations from supporters in their native currency. Bitcoin isn't native currency for anyone, and anyone who wishes to make a Bitcoin donation could certainly do so using a more standard currency. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
I can think of a few reasons why we should accept bitcoin: * It's consistent with our leadership in internet technology * Our peers like EFF, and Internet archive accept it * It's secured using the same kinds of encryption we rely on to maintain user privacy * It permits donations from countries that do not have Visa/Mastercard services * It has a fanatically loyal and growing following that is dying to give us money in that currency Most imporantly, current technology would permit us to accept bitcoin without ever *holding* bitcoin. Companies like BitPay ( https://bitpay.com/) and CoinBase ( https://coinbase.com/) are little different than accepting Visa, Mastercard, or Paypal. It's now possible for funds received as bitcoins to be *immediately* converted to USD. I don't think we should 'make a statement' by accepting bitcoin, I think the currency is simply at the stage where it would be to our benefit to do so. Jake (Ocaasi) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 7:10 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote: MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: It's funny, I just had a look at the wikimedia-l archive around January 2012... you know, that time when Wikipedia literally shut itself down as a political statement. The following month, the Wikimedia Foundation established a Community Advocacy department, not to be confused with lobbying, of which you're now a member. I can appreciate the many legitimate reasons to not accept Bitcoin and I'm grateful for your candid thoughts on the matter, but the idea that you, of all people, would try to claim that it might (gasp!) insert politics into Wikipedia is simply disrespectful to history and reality. I interpreted James Alexander's statement to mean that it's not our job and not our role to make the particular political statement that Bitcoin's proponents seek. This doesn't mean that it's *never* okay for us to engage in advocacy of a political nature, particularly in response to something potentially threatening a WMF project's very existence. (Whether SOPA and PIPA actually posed a significant threat is debatable, but the action in question stemmed from the belief that they did.) David Levy David is right, I think the SOPA/PIPA decision was the correct one in the end but I very highly respect those who did not/do not think it was. Even there I was highly uncomfortable making a strong political statement, especially using the project, and had to wrestle with myself a fair bit before I did it. There is no doubt that we, as an organization and a community, are not 'neutral' in everything but I think we should avoid being political unless we think it directly effects us and we have thought deeply about it. I have no issue with the foundation and community advocating for internet privacy/copyright laws etc for example but even those we need to be very picky about. I do not think this arrises to that level yet. On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Jake Orlowitz jorlow...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think we should 'make a statement' by accepting bitcoin, I think the currency is simply at the stage where it would be to our benefit to do so. Jake (Ocaasi) Without getting into some of your other arguments at the moment because of lack of time (through I don't agree with them all) I do think it's impossible to avoid 'making a statement' here. Whenever we do something we have to not only think about it from what 'we' are trying to make a statement about but also how it will be viewed. I think it is guaranteed that the commercial and non commercial community who has been pushing this for 4+ years will see it as a huge win and approval for their methods and that given their consistent strategies we will be used as a reason for many others to sign on as well with our 'support' being paraded around. If we're going to do it, we need to know it's going to be seen and used as a statement whether we want it to or not. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Hi Megan, If someone wants to donate the harvestable platinum from an asteroid, would you please make sure that an appropriately progressive excise tax is paid to the ufohastings.com concerns? Thanks muchly. On Dec 11, 2013 8:03 PM, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org You can reach the person managing the list at wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest... Today's Topics: 1. [Reminder] Language Engineering IRC Office Hour today December 11, 2013 at 1700 UTC (Runa Bhattacharjee) 2. Re: Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method (Tom Morris) 3. Re: Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method (David Gerard) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 15:41:30 +0530 From: Runa Bhattacharjee rbhattachar...@wikimedia.org To: MediaWiki internationalisation mediawiki-i...@lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia developers wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org, wikitech-ambassad...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Reminder] Language Engineering IRC Office Hour today December 11, 2013 at 1700 UTC Message-ID: cae7qtstwanwsmcj0m2yo_jk7vnk3nvy0gr_wjsob5j3drmh...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello, This is a reminder that the Wikimedia Language Engineering team will be hosting an IRC office hour from 1700 to 1800UTC later today on #wikimedia-office (FreeNode). Please see below for the event details. Thanks Runa === Event Details === What: WMF Language Engineering Office hour When: December 11, 2013 (Wednesday). 1700-1800 UTC http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20131211T1700 Where: IRC Channel #wikimedia-office on FreeNode -- Forwarded message -- From: Runa Bhattacharjee rbhattachar...@wikimedia.org Date: Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:19 PM Subject: Language Engineering IRC Office Hour on December 11, 2013 (Wednesday) at 1700 UTC To: MediaWiki internationalisation mediawiki-i...@lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia developers wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org, wikitech-ambassad...@lists.wikimedia.org [x-posted] Hello, The Wikimedia Language Engineering team will be hosting an IRC office hour on Wednesday, December 11, 2013 between 17:00 - 18:00 UTC on #wikimedia-office. (See below for timezone conversion and other details.) We will be talking about some of our recent and upcoming projects and then taking questions for the remaining time. Questions and any other concerns can also be sent to me directly before the event. See you there! Thanks Runa === Event Details === What: WMF Language Engineering Office hour When: December 11, 2013 (Wednesday). 1700-1800 UTC http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20131211T1700 Where: IRC Channel #wikimedia-office on FreeNode -- Language Engineering - Outreach and QA Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation -- Language Engineering - Outreach and QA Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:58:39 +0100 From: Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method Message-ID: 1386759519.20606.58239989.134fb...@webmail.messagingengine.com Content-Type: text/plain I demand that the Wikimedia Foundation start accepting the following: Litecoin Namecoin PPCoin Feathercoin Craftcoin Quarkcoin Freicoin Devcoin Terracoin BBQCoin Netcoin Actually, scrap that, I've got an even better Ponzi scheme - sorry, cryptocurrency: TomCoin. And, best of all, if you start taking TomCoins I'll be happy to give you a million of them. No, wait, how about a billion? -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ -- Message: 3 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:32:10 + From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method Message-ID: caj0tu1f8on5aa6o+98797zwyemozbvnmtewdkacrobtqs0m...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 It's *completely* wrong to call these things Ponzi schemes. *Technically*, they're pump-and-dumps. - d. On 11 Dec 2013 10:59, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: I demand that the Wikimedia Foundation start
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On 12/12/13 02:54, Nathan wrote: Bitcoin isn't native currency for anyone, and anyone who wishes to make a Bitcoin donation could certainly do so using a more standard currency. Well, this article from a year ago argues that bitcoin is safer for donors than donating national currency: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/06/29/wikipedia-accepts-enemies-of-the-internet-currencies/ But just don’t try to donate safely in bitcoin — it’s not accepted. [...] Accepting anonymous bitcoin in addition to political currencies can be a way of declaring that freedom of speech still does matter. I would think that if anonymity is the main concern, a transaction system with a public log of all transactions would not be the best choice. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity The obvious time-tested choice for anonymous payment is, of course, cash. Many charities do accept cash donations. Cash could be donated to the local chapter by dropping it into a donation box, then it could be either spent on local programs or forwarded to WMF. -- Tim Starling ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Hi! I'm sure that the WMF fundraising people are all aware of this, but this isn't exactly a well-known issue, so please excuse this short introduction. For a few months now, there has been quite a strong push from the Bitcoin community to accept that currency as a donation method; the issue has been gaining more and more significance ever since the start of this years' fundraising campaign. As far as I am aware, the only response so far from the Foundation is that they do not accept any currencies that are not backed by by the full faith and credit of an issuing government. [1] I'm sure those reading this list can Google the topic themselves, so I won't link to the many angry discussion that are taking place on the interwebs right now; instead, I'll ask this: does the Foundation intend to accept Bitcoin as a donation method any time soon? Does the Foundation realize that the payment processing company Bitpay has kindly set up a merchant account that is transferring money to the WMF every day? [2] Can you let us know the reasons behind the decision of not accepting Bitcoin other than those mentioned on the FAQ page I linked? I'm not in any way related to the Bitcoin movement, but I'm sure that many people would appreciate hearing more about this. I should also perhaps mention for those interested in donating in Bitcoin that Wikimedia New York City, the chapter for NYC, does accept Bitcoins: https://nyc.wikimedia.org/wiki/Donate. Maybe there are other chapters or affiliates that allow this method of donating? Tomasz == References == * [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Why_does_the_Wikimedia_Foundation_not_currently_accept_Bitcoin.3F * [2] http://blog.bitpay.com/2012/11/donate-to-wikipedia-with-bitcoin.html ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
I'm a little skeptical about the charitable nature of Bitpay's offer to hold funds for the WMF. It doesn't help that they refer to Wikipedia's bank accounts, but in the absence of other evidence I suspect that Bitpay is taking advantage of the volatility of Bitcoin exchange rates to profit from the delay between receiving Bitcoin transactions and forwarding dollar donations. That assumes that they are, in fact, forwarding donations at all. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
That assumes that [Bitpay] are, in fact, forwarding donations at all. We have received some funds from them. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Matthew Walker mwal...@wikimedia.orgwrote: That assumes that [Bitpay] are, in fact, forwarding donations at all. We have received some funds from them. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team Thanks Matt. I'm still concerned that they are offering the service at least partly to profit from the currency spread. That may be true of any potential third party Bitcoin payment processor, at least at this point in the currency's effort to go mainstream. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: Can you let us know the reasons behind the decision of not accepting Bitcoin other than those mentioned on the FAQ page I linked? Has there been any discussion about simply accepting Bitcoins but not exchanging them? Off-hand, I can't see any potential harm if the Wikimedia Foundation only accepts Bitcoin donations, though I imagine it could make tax reporting trickier. (That is, is it settled whether such a transfer would constitute income? Are Bitcoin donations considered tax deductible?) This issue probably has enough outside attention to warrant a blog post on the Wikimedia blog (https://blog.wikimedia.org). MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On 11/12/13 06:58, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: I'm sure those reading this list can Google the topic themselves, so I won't link to the many angry discussion that are taking place on the interwebs right now; I tried Googling, including news and blog searches, and couldn't work out what you are talking about. Maybe you should provide links. -- Tim Starling ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
