Hey Dennis, as the co-organizer of most of the Bitcoin Core developer meetings in the last years, I can say there is no industry lobbying at these events. They are for the Bitcoin Core project contributors, not for industry.
You can see all of the events, each events' sponsors, as well as transcripts for the sessions (which began in the last years) here:
https://coredev.tech/pastevents.htmlSponsors of these events simply have an acknowledgment of their sponsorship of the event on the website, which also serves as transparency as to who is sponsoring these events.
You are welcome to query or corroborate that these events are in no way related to industry lobbying with other co-organizers like
@adamcjonas,
@moneyball, @
jonasschnelli, as well.
I wont tag the attendees of these historical events out of privacy, practicality, and out of consideration for not annoying them with this on social media, but they are welcome to attest to their experiences at these events as focused on Bitcoin technicals and the Bitcoin Core project and not in any way a venue for industry/companies to come lobby them.
--
Also, as the executive director of Brink, who I believe you are referring to as the recipient of Marathon's $500,000 donation, I can speak to that as well.
As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Brink must operate exclusively for the public good, not to benefit any individual, company, or donor. Donors cannot, and do not, direct our operations, programs, or decision-making.
Our donation agreements specifically also outline this clause: 'NO QUID PRO QUO: The Donation is made voluntarily and without expectation of goods, services, business advantages, or promotional benefits in return.'
Additionally our board of directors, including independent members, approve all donations of this size before we accept them. They have the sole and final authority over how all funds are used, and we are very protective of that independence. This ensures that every gift furthers Brink’s charitable mission and preserves our nonprofit status. There have been 8 board members of Brink over these 5 years of operation, 6 of which are independent from Brink (myself and John as co-founders being the other two). All of these board members have been publicly named and their reputations speak for themselves. Here are their twitter handles if you are curious:
@jfnewbery,
@jerrybrito,
@actuallyCarlaKC,
@hrdng,
@Snyke,
@jonathanbier,
@Leishman,
@bitschmidty (this tagging will also alert them to this post so they can call out any falsehoods in my explanations)
We, voluntarily, also pay an third party independent auditing company, Rogers & Company, who can and does review these agreements and the associated donations, and flows of money in and out of Brink to ensure compliance.
This voluntary audit, that we choose to do and pay to do each year, is separate and in addition to our other obligations we have for compliance like annual 990 filings.
Additionally, we have a separate grant committee, that also includes independent members, who help decide which engineers to fund and which to continue funding. The quality and reputation of these members over the years also I believe speaks volumes.
The engineering applicants for Brink and the engineers that we end up funding, choose their own focuses for projects, sub projects, and research areas. We simply provide them the funding to execute on their vision.
Additionally, we specifically have crafted the agreements we have with the engineers that we fund to be favorable for their independence. For example, for the engineers that we employ, we have a zero notice out clause for engineers, so that in the event Brink acted in a way they object to, they can immediately terminate the agreement (whereas Brink must give 3 months notice). We also simply state in the agreement that the expectation we have of the engineers is to execute the work described in their own proposal.
The board, the grant commitee, myself, Emily (who oversees much of the administration, operations, and compliance), and the donors do not direct the day-to-day work of the engineers.
Any of our current or past engineers can also happily attest or object to anything that I have said here:
@macrohead7,
@fanquake,
@hhebasto,
@theStack,
@dergoegge,
@stphnvlstk,
@fjahr, Crypt-iQ (no twitter),
@jesseposner,
@lightlike1,
@brrrunog,
@0xB10C,
@tdryja,
@afilini,
@larryruane,
@palazzovincenzo,
@glozowI hope that both the structure of Brink, our processes, as well as the number and independence of people involved at all levels that Ive outlined here can show how seriously we take the independence of Brink as an organization from our donors as well as our engineers' freedom from Brink as an organization.