Millions of Anonymous Whistle Blowers Or Just a Few Famous Dead Ones?

By Marc Gauvin

Copyright © 9/10/2014

Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution is given and original link is provided.

 

Interesting to realise how we are all vulnerable because individual personalities might be censored, corrupted or even worse snuffed out.   But notice how we are all so willingly censored when a nobody shares truth that we can, if we took the time,  figure out for ourselves but instead we say stupidities like: "Even if that were true 'THEY' are not going to let us get away with that!"  Notice the "Even if that were true..." the whole point being to take the time to know if something is or isn't true,  we can know much more than we do, why don't we then?  We are mostly anonymous so "we" in this case cannot be censored "we" can only be mislead but not silenced.

Today we can know so much more stuff "for sure" on our own than ever before,  that we should be removing the pressure on these few whistle blowers by simply supporting en mass the truths WE CAN BE SURE OF.  Instead it seems,  we watch how a few others suffer tragic consequences for saying spectacular things that we CAN'T KNOW FOR SURE, I mean when someone talks about an interpretation of what happened we may be lead to believe fallacies like since so and so is speaking against "you know who" at his dire peril, the he must be saying the truth.   But that is a far cry from believing something conclusive like the system is ruining your present and the future looks worse everyday not better, which is conclusively true on all counts.  But that is pretty useless if we don't understand the underlying mechanisms.  So, can we know anything conclusive about those mechanisms?  Well yes we can, if of course we are willing to take the time.

So, my point is why don't we just focus on what we can know and be faithful to that along side everyone else capable of doing the same.   If we are alone with the truth we are no one's threat if we are few with the truth the liars don't want to give us air time so they leave us alone but if we are millions with the truth NOTHING CAN BE DONE TO STOP IT!!!

So really, the best strategy is to leave out all the demagoguery, the inconclusive political and social theories and instead focus on simple demonstrable facts.    One demonstrable fact that no one has yet published a formal counter proof of,  is the FACT that the very definition of money that is assumed by everyone is utter nonsense.  As such and according to the universally accepted principle of contract law that states:  "Invalid things cannot be made valid by subsequent acts" then it follows directly that a nonsense definition of money cannot be validated by us all believing it isn't nonsense after the fact,  and if it is nonsense then the contracts themselves cannot be valid either.  If the money contracts are not valid then there is no "financial" crisis and without a financial crisis we are all pretty much freed up to solve real problems mounting day by day.

So take the time today to read this short piece and for more info on the current money fallacy see this document.   And don't forget to read the book in the link below.


Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for.

 

Implementation Agnostic Problem Statement (IAPS)

For "Money" and "Money Systems" V.1.0

By Marc Gauvin on behalf of:

Copyright ©7/9/2014

Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution is given and original link is provided.


Introduction

With regards to all the discussions about money and proposed alternatives to the current de facto standard and in keeping with best practices in standards development, we all need to agree upon a common logically coherent and consistent generic problem statement that is implementation agnostic.

"Implementation agnostic", implies that we shouldn't assume anything about how solutions will work, i.e. we are thinking prior to any decision to use digital, use coins or bills nor assume any of the consequences of such implementations as requirements. Instead, we lay out the logic of the problem that ostensibly is addressed by money, derive a set of more granular logical requirements and then define functions and their relations (logical and temporal dependencies).

Throughout this process we will develop a minimum core set of terms and definitions such where all terms used in those definitions are understood literally and unequivocally by everyone who reads them, i.e. we may need to define or refine definitions of terms so that they cannot be misunderstood or present any ambiguity.

If we don't go through this process for this important topic and many others for that matter, we will forever be talking past each other and or in unresolvable circular logic. Only by having an agreed upon problem statement and subsequent requirements to point to, can we have a meaningful and constructive discussion about the best way to define and use money and/or any alternative to money as we will possess an unequivocal COMMON understanding of what money CAN be as opposed to what it is purported to be.

The process begins with an initial set of statements we believe is needed in a solution, in the form "Money shall be/do X, Y or Z ....."  We then review this list to identify contradictory or incompatible notions and form the best most comprehensive list.  Finally,  we identify the list of functions (always at a generic logical level) and order them in logical and temporal dependencies e.g. A cannot take place until B happens first or If A then B is not possible. 

General Rules/Guidlines for participants:

No one is required to know what they don't know but all are required to prove what they claim to know. This is a knowledge building community with no tolerance for trolls, demagoguery, or sophism. This work has the potential to create extraordinary and reliable knowledge capable of altering the course of contemporary events in a conciliatory fashion. The group administrator(s) reserve the right to change modify and enforce the rules as they see fit after providing at least three warnings and alerting the group of the nature and details of any offence.

(Note all participants are required to accept and do their utmost to abide and require others to abide by these rules and guidelines)

General Rules of Debate

  1. All new and current participants agree to keep these core rules.
  2. All participants agree to refrain from paraphrasing and/or misrepresenting the content of this work in other fora agreeing to defend the groups integrity outside the group and informing group members of any communications of proceedings or generated documents and materials (see: IAPSM Group Operation) prior to such communications. By default all group documents will be posted at www.bibocurrency.com.
  3. All participants will be credited correspondingly for their contributions.
  4. All participants will represent themselves and are expected to declare any relevant affiliations.
  5. All participants are to refer directly and only to statements given by other participants (beginning with the initial draft problem statement to be edited/improved/expanded by the group).
  6. All questions must be responded to by the person who made the initial statement being queried at the earliest possible time following the query.
  7. All affirmations must be set in complete valid arguments, premises, argument and conclusions. See Deductive reasoning here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
  8. Outside references may never be required although they may be provided for purposes of attribution or general information.
  9. All statements must stand on their own merit i.e. "I already answered" or "if you read this and this..., is not sufficient, all answers must be provided in the direct context of the current question or point of debate.
  10. Paraphrasing other participants arguments is strictly forbidden any reference to a colleagues statement must be in the form of a direct quote.
  11. Other to define the origin of a statement, statements about a person particularly derogatory ones are strictly forbidden.  Statements may be proven to be foolish but people never are foolish.
  12. Any other rules required to enforce the current set are implicitly included.
  13. The Administrator(s) reserve the right to remove or delete any posts or comments and if need be participants that do not conform to the rules of this community.

AD HOC Groups/Threads

  1. Participants are expected to volunteer for group support tasks such as maintaining documents (Problem Statement & Requirements, Terminology, Functions, Logical and temporal dependencies e.g. "A depends on B to happen first") and dealing with issues and conflicts.
  2. Separate AD HOC threads (Terminology, Requirements, Functions, Dependencies etc.) will be created as required each will have a designated Chair, responsible for maintaining the conduct and synchronising with other relevant threads.  AD HOC threads shall be face book posts bearing a title with format:

    AD HOC Thread - (some number) 
    Title:  "Some agreed title"
    Created: "day/month/year
    Chair:  "Full name responsible person"

  3. All Threads will require a Chair a stated purpose and rationale.
  4. All Threads will maintain a facebook external document of its proceedings to be published to the group.

 

Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for.

    IAPSM Group Operations V.1.0

    By Marc Gauvin on behalf of:

    Face Book Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1551545848400185/

    Copyright ©7/9/2014

    Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution is given and original link is provided.


    This document is in support of:

    IAPSM AD HOC Thread - 0
    Title:  IAPSM Group Operation.
    Created: 7/9/14
    Chair:  Marc Gauvin
    Participants: to be determined


    This document explains the group operation in the interest of having well focussed discussions that build on each other.  Hence rather than allowing anyone to spontaneously create threads, we require that threads be created as per rules of the current version of  IAPSM Introduction and Rules document, where each facebook post within the group represents a previously designated "IAPSM AD HOC Thread" by having been listed prior to its creation in the following IAPSM AD HOC Thread 2 (see below):

    The preliminary list of "Mission Critical AD HOC Threads follows:

    AD HOC Thread - 1
    Title: IAPSM Impelementation Agnostic Problem Statement
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  Sepp Hasslberger

    Participants: to be determined

    AD HOC Thread - 2
    Title: IAPSM Designated AD HOC Thread List
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  To be determined

    Participants: to be determined

    AD HOC Thread - 3
    Title: IAPSM Terminology and Definitions
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  To be determined

    Participants: to be determined

    AD HOC Thread - 4
    Title: IAPSM Implementation Agnostic Requirements (IAR)
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  To be determined

    Participants: to be determined

    AD HOC Thread - 5
    Title: IAPSM Function List
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  To be determined

    Participants: to be determined

    AD HOC Thread - 6
    Title: IAPSM IAR Function Logical and Temporal Dependencies
    Created: "day/month/year" to be determined
    Chair:  To be determined

    Participants: to be determined


    Each AD HOC will be required to organise itself and its participants around the creation of a document such as this one to be kept outside of facebook and accessible to all members of the group. By default all documents will be published here.

     

    Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

    a future they can be proud of you for.

      Additional information