Constructive Critism vs. Unconstructive Critism of OpenSats \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Constructive Critism vs. Unconstructive Critism of OpenSats

3505 sats \ 24 comments \ @kepford 2 Jul bitcoin

I do not understand most of the criticism of OpenSats.

I mean, I think I do but it is couched in a lot of nonsense about secrecy and lack of transparency. I wonder if its sour grapes mostly. People that were not funded. People that are jealous. I dunno. It bugs me.

I'm not saying OpenSats is perfect but its just one of several orgs that support projects. Every time I hear an uneducated and unfair criticism of it I wanna say, "go do it better and show us how its done".

One of my biggest pet peeves is when people infantalize themselves or others. People choose to give to OpenSats. People are capable of reading their web site, looking at the projects they support and deciding if they would rather donate directly to devs/projects or not donate at all.

There are many non-profits in the world. MANY of them I would never give any money to. It is insane to me to throw rocks at one that is supporting good things. I'm not saying they are above criticism but the criticism should be fair, informed, and logical. I see very little that fit that mold.

If you have a problem with someone doing at least some good, your message is easier to take if you aren't petty and unfair in your criticism. Criticism is needed and has massive value but many seem to suck at creating the valuable kind.

view all related items

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @IamSINGLE 3 Jul

https://m.stacker.news/38014

126 sats \ 2 replies \ @tomlaies 2 Jul

"go do it better and show us how its done"

I do hate it when people say valid criticism is only valid if one offers suggestions for improvement.

That's not how it works. There are plenty of things on earth that do deserve criticism without any suggestions for improvement

45 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

Yeah, that is a fair point for some things. Like communism. Like murder. But the cost of criticism is so small that it invites thoughtless commentary.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 2 Jul

Exactly.

Idk how to "solve" murder. But I know it do be bad tho.

84 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 2 Jul

I don't get it either. I think on balance OpenSats is a positive. If people don't like it then don't donate to them.

69 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

Yeah, its that simple to me as well.

Odell asks for feedback but most of the feedback I see is public and seems to be in bad faith.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 3 Jul

IMO, Criticism of any kind is good. It's better to have criticism than not to have at all. Yes, it should be constructive but there are people who are always haters.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 3 Jul

I think OpenSats is a net benefit to the ecosystem. If you don't agree with a project or something go and donate to something else on Geyser. It is a free market.

213 sats \ 0 replies \ @btcschellingpnt 9 Jul

OpenSats volunteer here .. yes, this pretty much aligns with my views too.

Like most healthy organisations, it's seeking to improve too - both outcomes, transparency and internal processes that increase efficiency and effectiveness. Thankfully it's not the sole organisation like this - Brink and HRF are two other US examples - tax deductible non-profits that support open source developers and projects working on freedom, bitcoin, and nostr and related projects.

Creating more such organisations would be a one way to "decentralise" the function; similar organisations in different parts of the world under different jurisdictions would be a good example. One other way is to contribute some portion of your energy to directly helping the organisations you think are doing important work.

For example, say you're a big Sparrow wallet user, or Zeus or Mutiny (or whatever) .. one of the ways you can help those teams is by testing early versions of new releases and giving them feedback. The earlier bugs or feature-idiocy is squashed in the development cycle, the better .. and as an existing real-world user .. you are one example of how that product is really used. Dev teams really appreciate this work .. and work it is because when you're giving that feedback it's not just "Hey, this is broken" .. it's "So, in this test case where I was doing the following things/flow, I observed <X> happened and I'm pretty sure <Y> should be happening because ...<reason>".

If you're technical, you can join github and contribute code or documentation expertise; there's lots of ways to actively contribute in the open source space. But it's up to you. YOU have to act.

66 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

Here's some criticism. Spell criticism correctly.

This is not the way.

You bring up some valid points. But you made a typo in your title misspelling criticism.

This is how you criticize and actually appear to be fair and coming from good will. I suspect most people that criticize poorly simply are angry and just want to do harm.

1032 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 2 Jul

All grant giving orgs get this kind of hate. Grants are permissioned things and when people don't get permission they assume it's because the people giving permission are corrupt. It's made a little worse by the orgs existing to promote decentralization and censorship resistance yet the orgs and their decisions aren't decentralized or censorship resistant.¹

If the orgs are interested in healing the problem, having some minority of funds set aside for a more transparent/open/democratic/experimental grant giving process might go a long way.

"Decentralization/censorship resistance for thee but not for me" is something I see a lot of in Bitcoin's influencer, podcast, and increasingly VC culture. I know it's not ill meaning or intentional, but hypocrisy neuters their message. The only bitcoin podcaster that walked the talk was @TheGuySwann when his listeners could vote on what he read. ↩

140 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

The barrier to entry to create an org like OpenSats isn't trivial. Forming a non-profit, creating a board, and running it take time commitments. I think part of the permissioned aspect is that if you are gonna be a part of one of these you don't really want that work to go to projects that you believe are not needed or are bad for the ecosystem. But as you say this invites criticism.

Bitcoin is that permissionless system though. I used to have this argument years ago with people about putting comments on my blog. I didn't wanna deal with it. It wasn't worth it to me. My response was always go create your own web site and comment there. I don't owe you anything just as you don't owe me anything.

That's how I feel about OpenSats. I don't wanna start something like that. I know how much work it is. If I look at it and see I don't like what they are doing I just don't support them with my money.

Decentralization isn't always good. I can sure tell you I'm not decentralizing the operating of my home for example. But centralizing things that have control. That I have an issue with. Things like OpenSats are voluntary. I'd love to see more orgs like OpenSats that would try to do things the way they think they should be done.

140 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

Yeah, I hear that and yet there is a clear value in these giving orgs. The biggest is being able to reduce the amount of wealth taken by the state and used to kill people. I know people hate taxes because it is theft. But when you stop and think about all the evil being done with that money and the money being pissed away, it makes one want to avoid the state getting any of it.

On the transparency side, there is always a tradeoff on transparency. To much and to little both cause issues. I do think many of these people that seem to hate OpenSats can't be appeased. That's my sense at least.

139 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 2 Jul

I do think many of these people that seem to hate OpenSats can't be appeased.

100%

55 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 2 Jul

Democracy never!

110 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 2 Jul

That's it. It's great that they are here. If you don't like them you can send sats directly to projects you like.

110 sats \ 0 replies \ @NRS 2 Jul

I strongly agree, especially since our society is surrounded by freedom and is lax in its details. Everyone who contributes something should not expect applause from others.

74 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rsync25 2 Jul

Bookmarked. I agree.

But centralizing in a unique player like them, I think become point fragile. By this I also support new alternatives as P2P Rights and others.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 3 Jul

Lots of non profits are crooked. The goodwill is all about profit now.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @pbl4eagain 3 Jul

didn't know there was criticism of open sats.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

For those that say OpenSats is anti-decentralization answer this question.

Is wallet app X anti-decentralization? Is bitcoin hodlr X anti-decentralization? Is OpenSats anti-decentralization? Is bitcoin investor X anti-decentralization?

Nothing OpenSats does makes it anti-decentralization. Its just that there are few orgs doing what they do.

Put another way. When there are only a few orgs/people doing something important that's not good. But the solution is more orgs/people competing with them. If a project is not picked by OpenSats that doesn't mean they can't be funded. It just means they have to be funded differently.

I am not saying OpenSats is decentralized. They aren't. But they also are doing good work from what I have seen. They aren't alone.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 2 Jul

Ha, and you know what.... SN is centralized. Nostr is not. But I really like SN a lot.

I don't think all centralization is bad but OpenSats is just one entity like SN is one site. Nothing stops some other bitcoiner from starting a site like SN and trying to do it differently.

The centralization argument just falls flat with me.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @southside263 2 Jul

I💜OpenSats haters.

🙃

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @2fde71bd70 2 Jul freebie

I do hate it when people say valid criticism is only valid if one offers suggestions for improvement. That's not how it works. There are plenty of things on earth that do deser

Footnotes