Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B77C002D for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:09:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3E1410E5 for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:09:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 4F3E1410E5 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.651 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qALv--_thdeC for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:09:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org AC16D410B2 Received: from mail-oa1-f48.google.com (mail-oa1-f48.google.com [209.85.160.48]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC16D410B2 for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:09:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa1-f48.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-127ba06d03fso46442705fac.3 for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 01:09:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=6kg8lycvb0YQstZh2UTcIvLD7XgN8U1U/hT36H+s1tM=; b=fLMy91vaWu1J8li0D/pYke/YntDvjqYAqhVe5CIwidFsLL06rY7NxOlUhLEn9m/m+O +/qFavNQDrql0d106WYS6X23DdWEB2fbXpE9kfcjU+sPgtlWypcYZWHhWvq0PMYmqJBw w3W9/1nheSFa+MChZiC8Ocyyrwh/0MBeAZRprIe8kgWHK6leFBh6mVQyPY8sD1692d5C p4M5aNnD4hI8fvKJ963HClJwuhB0jooae5pI2ZcKJOgQ9+vKvk6Q1goctT5tSljhilA7 Lcoe71ychvazSYiirSVEw5WL3ChGmDZjG7RN6ydOAiArUfpY1UgLgr8yFva2JGtYTm7U MzqA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3M2VsO0kv7X8W10in/B5p/bENeZimEnkQMeRVYcTeQqQSV4I32 h+hVI3lTEhWRw+y9LwiRghTo1tYgdy/SGhHZiJ00kg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7YxiE5Ja3i5MYFhDaprg1KuMXlmPGKSxc2ukKf2E1gCVGSZ/P05IzZV5gghhwLnoOnTjX5IknjSGq3rbJJQ+g= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:41cf:b0:118:7eb8:4875 with SMTP id z15-20020a05687041cf00b001187eb84875mr4574659oac.181.1663229393431; Thu, 15 Sep 2022 01:09:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Devrandom Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 10:05:27 +0200 Message-ID: To: Ryan Grant , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002d036d05e8b2c5cf" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:37:22 +0000 Cc: Buck O Perley Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On a new community process to specify covenants X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 08:09:56 -0000 --0000000000002d036d05e8b2c5cf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 6:03 PM Ryan Grant via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 2:47 AM Buck O Perley via bitcoin-dev > First just wanted to thank you > for taking the initiative to > > put this together. I think that as the community and > > ecosystem continue to grow, it's going to be an important > > part of the process to have groups like this develop. Hopefully > > they allow us to resist the "Tyranny of Structurelessness" without > > resorting to formalized governance processes and systems. > > Huh, lots of reading material behind that phrase. I'd heard it > before, but hadn't looked it up. > > > > Defining a communication channel is still an open question: IRC, Slack, > > Discord, Discourse, ... > > > > I would vote against Slack. IRC is probably the best but maybe too > > high a barrier to entry? Publishing logs at least would counter > > concerns of it being exclusive. Maybe discord as an alternative. > > I found Discord immediately wanted a phone number from me. I think > IRC remains the lowest bar for participants to contribute. > > Agreed, anything that requires a phone number makes it difficult to be pseudonymous. I recommend Matrix, since it doesn't require any privacy invasive information and has e2ee by default for 1-1 conversations. The Matrix room could optionally bridge to IRC if there is a significant demand for that. --0000000000002d036d05e8b2c5cf Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 6:03 PM Ryan Gran= t via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Mon,= Sep 12, 2022 at 2:47 AM Buck O Perley via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> First just wanted to than= k you
for taking the initiative to
> put this together. I think that as the community and
> ecosystem continue to grow, it's going to be an important
> part of the process to have groups like this develop. Hopefully
> they allow us to resist the "Tyranny of Structurelessness" w= ithout
> resorting to formalized governance processes and systems.

Huh, lots of reading material behind that phrase.=C2=A0 I'd heard it before, but hadn't looked it up.

> > Defining a communication channel is still an open question: IRC, = Slack,
> Discord, Discourse, ...
>
> I would vote against Slack. IRC is probably the best but maybe too
> high a barrier to entry? Publishing logs at least would counter
> concerns of it being exclusive. Maybe discord as an alternative.

I found Discord immediately wanted a phone number from me.=C2=A0 I think IRC remains the lowest bar for participants to contribute.


Agreed, anything that requires a phone= number makes it difficult to be pseudonymous.

I recommend Matrix, since it doesn't require any privacy invasive info= rmation and has e2ee by default for 1-1 conversations.

<= /div>
The Matrix room could optionally bridge to IRC if there is a sign= ificant demand for that.

--0000000000002d036d05e8b2c5cf--