rich1.0npub1trckpcxmceskq4cykxgwxm63n8ugrjrpu5mk83c90e4upsf7d9gqf0f95jhttps://nostr.ae/npub1trckpcxmceskq4cykxgwxm63n8ugrjrpu5mk83c90e4upsf7d9gqf0f95jnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2013-12-09 📝 Original message:> The bitcoin.org domain is controlled by me, Sirius, and an anonymous > person. Control will not be lost if Sirius becomes unavailable. I know this will be a controversial viewpoint in some quarters, but I'm not a fan of anonymity, or of pseudonyms. As far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong) all the core devs go by their real names with the exception of Satoshi (and I would hope he no longer has commit access? - only because I would hope that no-one has pseudonymous commit access these days). I don't see why this should be different for the domain, the DNS and the rest of the infrastructure... Although that's separate from the question of who the registrant of the domain should be (the registrant being the closest thing a domain has to a recorded legal owner). Who currently purports to be the current legal owner of the domain? IMHO the registrant should obviously be real and not WhoisGuard - anonymous stuff like this always looks shady. And surely the Bitcoin Foundation is the obvious candidate to own the domain (just like kernel.org is owned by the Linux Foundation). But this may all be moot unless the current legal owners are willing to assign the domain... roy