@TheGlobber, I'm sorry for any misunderstandings and appreciate your last post. It really looked sarcastic when you said you understood everything since we haven't really been much instructive because we just pointed you to the wiki.

It's not that we want to discard ideas like yours upfront, it's just that it is so conflicting with the established technology that we just don't know where to start. Bitcoins don't just attract smart computer geeks for nothing; it truly is complex, well-thought, and beautiful, and from what I could tell, it's being implemented quite well so far (there are unimplemented things, but what's implemented is doing a good job, AFAIK).

That aside, I agree with you that Bitcoin isn't just algorithm/software, and that a lot more thought should be put into making it appealing to end-users. I have noticed that weakness (nerd people have a hard time understanding what it means to be a simple user) for a while now, and I'd certainly like to devote a lot to that in the future, since I'm not guru enough to help with Bitcoin's core aspects, and I think I have good "tact" as a user.

An important thing is that Bitcoin is far from being capable of handling mass adoption (it's something we certainly don't want right now). For that reason, it doesn't *need* to be too user-friendly right now, although I really think we should be putting a lot more effort on that, so that we're ready sooner for the big show