Oddbean

nostr:nprofile1qqsw3znfr6vdnxrujezjrhlkqqjlvpcqx79ys7gcph9mkjjsy7zsgygpr9mhxue69uhhqatjv9mxjerp9ehx7um5wghxcctwvsq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarjd93kztnrdaksz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ekk7um5wgh8qatz7tvu4p sits on the 9 member board that determines what projects are funded by the organization. There is a growing view that Bitcoin projects are not being funded by OpenSats due to conflicts of interests from board members. Regardless if NVK is abstaining or not, his presence on the board only leads to concerns from members of the Bitcoin community. There are very qualified members of the community that could provide the technical guidance to the Board's decisions that are not nearly in a level of conflict that NVK brings.

The "Bitcoin community" should start it's own non-profit to pay devs. Especially if there are very qualified members. OpenSats is an organization. Organizations are not decentralized. They are centrally controlled. If you don't like Open Sats because you don't like 11.1111% of the board, I would consider donating to a different non-profit. I understand your concern but your recommendation sounds entitled and irrational.

I don't either but I can certainly see how this will affect funding for the organization in total. I hope nostr:nprofile1qqsxu35yyt0mwjjh8pcz4zprhxegz69t4wr9t74vk6zne58wzh0waycpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qg4waehxw309ahx7um5wghx77r5wghxgetk9uq3samnwvaz7tmxd9k8getj9ehx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsj7hdd2 would consider these calls from many members of the Bitcoin community and at least call a special meeting per Art III, Section 7 to allow board members to make that decision on an individual personal level. I also trust mayn of the other board members and would hope they'd do the right thing for the organization.

Let's say nostr:nprofile1qqsw3znfr6vdnxrujezjrhlkqqjlvpcqx79ys7gcph9mkjjsy7zsgygpr9mhxue69uhhqatjv9mxjerp9ehx7um5wghxcctwvsq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarjd93kztnrdaksz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ekk7um5wgh8qatz7tvu4p is hostile to anyone opposing his business moat when they apply to nostr:nprofile1qqs8suecw4luyht9ekff89x4uacneapk8r5dyk0gmn6uwwurf6u9ruspzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghszxthwden5te0wfjkccte9eekummjwsh8xmmrd9skctcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhs2juazd. Which 4 other board members share the same interest that enables this bias? Let's be specific and name names. They are all publicly listed. The easiest is nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ex2mrfw3jhxtn0wfnszynhwden5te0wahhgtn4w3ux7tn0dejszxthwden5te0wdjkuerfwshxummnvekxzun99e3k7mgrcp7e2 since he's invested in CoinKite. Who are the other 3 and why would they be biased?

Opensats is losing credibility and thereby donations with him on the board, which hurts the greater FOSS community upon which Bitcoin is built. Some of my personal favorite FOSS projects are clearly discriminated against by the Opensats board.

Conflicts of interests, absolutely. In the name of transparency you should probably disclose your business relationship causing your own personal bias here. I have no dog in this fight. Only interested in FOSS, which is what Opensats is supposed to be supporting. No one has worked harder to obfuscate the definition of FOSS.

Please name the conflicts and total the % of the board that share the same or similar conflicts. I bought a grip of cold cards as a reseller. They're my slowest moving product and I should bought Bitcoin instead. I've also receive Open Sats funding for Q4 2023. Not sure how that plays into a bias here. I think NVK shouldn't sue OSS devs. I also think he's fine to stay on Open Sats board. RE: obfuscation Have you seen the Operation Orchestra video? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3jQoAYRKqhg