References: <1342374776.83467.YahooMailNeo@web121004.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<CA+8xBpd1TZg45Tp5hDzLRGsgJ3bh2=CSxgqjN2WaBPv0i6MxVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201207170009.51016.luke@dashjr.org>
Message-ID: <1342516677.79507.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 02:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>
To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <201207170009.51016.luke@dashjr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoin.org - remove hackathon
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>

OK, pull request seems good.=0A=0AFYI we lost money on last year's conferen=
ce, and are hoping to break even this year. The only people to make profit =
will be nefario and anyone else we give a share in it (people who help real=
ise it). Otherwise money made goes towards next year's conference and payin=
g for things to make a better conference (like Gavin wanted to attend but c=
ouldn't afford a ticket). It is not a commercial event, and I've been pushi=
ng to keep the sponsorship and community parts highly separated. Like I rea=
lly do not wish to sell a speaker slot, but if I have to (to pay the bills)=
 then it will be obvious due to scheduling and disclaimers that speakers ar=
e sponsors.=0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0AFrom: Luke-Jr <luke@d=
ashjr.org>=0ATo: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net=0ACc: Jeff Garzi=
k <jgarzik@exmulti.com>; Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>=0ASent: Tuesday, Ju=
ly 17, 2012 2:09 AM=0ASubject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoin.org - remo=
ve hackathon=0A=0AOn Monday, July 16, 2012 11:47:02 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:=
=0A> Vladimir does raise a fair point, though.=A0 Hackathon seems appropria=
te=0A> for bitcoin.org as it is focused on dev-related activities.=A0 (full=
=0A> disclosure: speaking at bitcoin2012.com)=A0 The conference might or=0A=
> might not be.=A0 The conference does seem community focused, so I don't=
=0A> object to it being on bitcoin.org...=A0 But if consensus prefers=0A> o=
therwise, that's OK too.=0A=0AIMO, bitcoin.org is more community-focussed a=
nyway.=0AHow often do devs use the site, compared to GitHub etc?=0A=0ASomeo=
ne else made a pullreq for Bitcoin Magazine; I suggest(ed) that=0Afor-profi=
t organizations should be asked to pitch in some way or another.=0AWho shou=
ld organize that, I don't know. If Bitcoin Consultancy/Amir is behind =0Ath=
e conference, I suggest their/his development contributions should be =0Asu=
fficient in that respect.=0A=0A> PS.=A0 This seems like material for pull r=
equests, which is preferred=0A> over mailing list email + git push.=A0 When=
 working on the satoshi=0A> client, we all ACK each other's pull req for an=
ything beyond the=0A> trivial.=0A=0AI concur, this should be discussed in a=
 pullreq.=0A