What people seem to forget is that anyone can join a foundation. Thats how foundations work. As long as you can show you can contribute to the community in a positive way.
Therefore, I really dont understand why some here are against it. It doesnt centralize a thing and it doesnt mean the foundation is some kind of "upperhand" system. Anyone can join you know.. Even you.
Its not some "15 man" illuminati group or something. It just protects, standardizes and promotes Blackcoin.
Havent some of you seen the bitcoin foundation. There are hundreds or even thousands of members.
Foundations are good and not mend to take over control. Some of you..Get over it
Therefore, I really dont understand why some here are against it. It doesnt centralize a thing and it doesnt mean the foundation is some kind of "upperhand" system. Anyone can join you know.. Even you.
Its not some "15 man" illuminati group or something. It just protects, standardizes and promotes Blackcoin.
Havent some of you seen the bitcoin foundation. There are hundreds or even thousands of members.
Foundations are good and not mend to take over control. Some of you..Get over it
I think it's a bad memory within the crypto-community cause Mark Karpales was a member of the bitcoin foundation.
I don't believe in foundations since then. It all starts with good intentions but end with insider knowledge on a trade-market
If something goes wrong in the future of blackcoin the foundation members will be informed first so they can cash out before the general public knows the bad news.
That is ILLEGAL.
That's the dark-side of the "we're just doing PR"-foundation.
I dont fully understand this argument because without foundation they can still make a PR group and cash out if they dont succeed. Investors and dump groups exist everywhere, even without foundation. Im sure that without foundation the "dev team" would still contact oneanother if something goes wrong.
I think in situations like these we have to look if the pro's outweight the cons because its a very contraversional discussion - and I think they do. Its not like if they label a group as a foundation they suddenly have insider information. They will have insider information anyway. Even without foundation.
To give a small example:
You could say that the foundation/large investors is a bad idea because they work together and with their so called "insider" information can manipulate the market;
On the other hand you could say that because they work together chances are smaller that someone dumps their stash and mess up the market.
I think people need to realize that its very controversional and should not just base their opinion on the small information they have. The people's opinions here are based on that what is most emotionally convenient for them. That is natural behavior. But its a bad way to see the bigger picture.