It's been some time since Bitcoin has given me reason to break out popcorn, the next few days should be quite fun to watch. :)
I have no particular opinion on which way this should swing, however it's clear that XT represents far more than just a block size change (and the XT web site even makes this explicit): it is another attempt at gaining increased control of the project, which is also mentioned by the linked Medium article as one of reasons Lightning isn't great for Bitcoin either.
While Mike and Gavin have long been members of the project, in good standing, and with no obvious reasons to doubt them, it's still worth giving a few moments thought to how the project may be impacted in the coming years should this "change in administration" succeed.
Gavin stepped down as lead developer on April 7, 2014. [1]
Most people would call that a year ago, or maybe one and a half years ago (rounding up from one year and four months). You purport to be “simply doing fact corrections” elsewhere in this thread. Misreporting basic periods of time does not jibe well with that assertion.
I would not normally be so pointed in my criticism but there is a strong disinformation and censorship campaign going on around this development fork. While that is happening you would do well to be very careful in what statements and ‘corrections’ you make.
Care to point to what Gavin has worked on in that time frame?
There are very few changes that Gavin has contributed back to Bitcoin Core since he handed most of the day-to-day repo management over the Wladimir.
I honestly don't know what you are referring to, unless it is the small patches here and there of similar size and importance to things we receive on a daily basis from dozens of people. Gavin pretty much disappeared from core development when he stepped down 2 years ago.
Sorry Maaku, but I think you are taking this thread off-topic. The number of contributions Gavin has made since stepping down from Leadership is not relevant to the point "Mike and Gavin have long been members of the project, in good standing, and with no obvious reasons to doubt them."
More specifically, the number of his recent commits (or other contributions) does not speak to (1) the length of time he has been a member of Bitcoin, (2) whether he has been in "good standing", or (3) whether there are obvious reasons to doubt him.
It appears, rather, that you have some ill feelings towards Gavin, and are letting these feelings leak into your thoughts by belittling Gavin's contributions to Bitcoin.
A better way to address this point, while still expressing your feelings, would be to say "Gavin is not in good standing with me. I think he's an asshole for going around our consensus process. Fuck him. I disagree that he is in good standing, and I doubt his leadership."
Maaku, your thoughts are getting sloppy. Nobody here claimed that Gavin leads bitcoin. Go back and read the post you were replying to, and try to find the words that you were "correcting." They don't exist.
It was you who first mentioned him leading Bitcoin when you said "Gavin stepped down 2 years ago." Now you are just arguing with yourself. You came into this conversation, imagined people talking about him leading Bitcoin, and then tried to do some "corrections" to the claims that you hallucinated.
Comments
It's been some time since Bitcoin has given me reason to break out popcorn, the next few days should be quite fun to watch. :)
I have no particular opinion on which way this should swing, however it's clear that XT represents far more than just a block size change (and the XT web site even makes this explicit): it is another attempt at gaining increased control of the project, which is also mentioned by the linked Medium article as one of reasons Lightning isn't great for Bitcoin either.
While Mike and Gavin have long been members of the project, in good standing, and with no obvious reasons to doubt them, it's still worth giving a few moments thought to how the project may be impacted in the coming years should this "change in administration" succeed.
Mike was never really involved in Bitcoin Core, and Gavin stepped down 2 years ago.
Gavin stepped down as lead developer on April 7, 2014. [1]
Most people would call that a year ago, or maybe one and a half years ago (rounding up from one year and four months). You purport to be “simply doing fact corrections” elsewhere in this thread. Misreporting basic periods of time does not jibe well with that assertion.
I would not normally be so pointed in my criticism but there is a strong disinformation and censorship campaign going on around this development fork. While that is happening you would do well to be very careful in what statements and ‘corrections’ you make.
[1] http://www.coindesk.com/gavin-andresen-steps-bitcoins-lead-d...
Make coined the name "Bitcoin Core".
Gavin is still a core developer. He stepped down from his Leadership position to become "just" a regular core developer.
(I know that Maaku knows this. Just clarifying for the crowd.)
Care to point to what Gavin has worked on in that time frame?
There are very few changes that Gavin has contributed back to Bitcoin Core since he handed most of the day-to-day repo management over the Wladimir.
I honestly don't know what you are referring to, unless it is the small patches here and there of similar size and importance to things we receive on a daily basis from dozens of people. Gavin pretty much disappeared from core development when he stepped down 2 years ago.
Sorry Maaku, but I think you are taking this thread off-topic. The number of contributions Gavin has made since stepping down from Leadership is not relevant to the point "Mike and Gavin have long been members of the project, in good standing, and with no obvious reasons to doubt them."
More specifically, the number of his recent commits (or other contributions) does not speak to (1) the length of time he has been a member of Bitcoin, (2) whether he has been in "good standing", or (3) whether there are obvious reasons to doubt him.
It appears, rather, that you have some ill feelings towards Gavin, and are letting these feelings leak into your thoughts by belittling Gavin's contributions to Bitcoin.
A better way to address this point, while still expressing your feelings, would be to say "Gavin is not in good standing with me. I think he's an asshole for going around our consensus process. Fuck him. I disagree that he is in good standing, and I doubt his leadership."
Gavin does not lead bitcoin. This is a simple fact. I am simply doing fact corrections.
Maaku, your thoughts are getting sloppy. Nobody here claimed that Gavin leads bitcoin. Go back and read the post you were replying to, and try to find the words that you were "correcting." They don't exist.
It was you who first mentioned him leading Bitcoin when you said "Gavin stepped down 2 years ago." Now you are just arguing with yourself. You came into this conversation, imagined people talking about him leading Bitcoin, and then tried to do some "corrections" to the claims that you hallucinated.