Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1Z5cYw-0005tZ-DM for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:21:10 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.45; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com; helo=mail-wg0-f45.google.com; Received: from mail-wg0-f45.google.com ([74.125.82.45]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5cYs-0006ar-BI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:21:10 +0000 Received: by wgzl5 with SMTP id l5so68317294wgz.3 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 09:21:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.95.67 with SMTP id di3mr28979115wib.78.1434644460345; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 09:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from amethyst.visucore.com (dhcp-089-098-228-253.chello.nl. [89.98.228.253]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id c11sm14475849wib.1.2015.06.18.09.20.59 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jun 2015 09:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 18:20:58 +0200 From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com> To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> Message-ID: <20150618162057.GA11901@amethyst.visucore.com> References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net> <CANEZrP3M7+BsZKLFZV-0A_fC7NmMGbTDxsx3ywru3dSW78ZskQ@mail.gmail.com> <20150618111407.GA6690@amethyst.visucore.com> <CANEZrP2iMXeL-5zyE2cvoyNRakhZbQfLXORZ2AhqEATQE-KjAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOG=w-sWimZTJe=4gCvC5R7SAEK+Nvo-hZtM7xC-bBQd0pG3mw@mail.gmail.com> <5582E3FE.7010206@bitcoins.info> <20150618154640.GA7840@amethyst.visucore.com> <CANEZrP016FjDZx9cNMbPR5nV0BRVxBCf-GEfD+59JseJcNWjvA@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP016FjDZx9cNMbPR5nV0BRVxBCf-GEfD+59JseJcNWjvA@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (laanwj[at]gmail.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [74.125.82.45 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.2 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Z5cYs-0006ar-BI Cc: g@amethyst.visucore.com, Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:21:10 -0000 On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 06:05:58PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: > Once a draft BIP has been submitted to bitcoin-development for > consideration, the Bitcoin Core maintainer will deliver a preliminary > yes/no verdict within three weeks. This verdict may be informed by the > debate that has taken part in the previous three weeks. If more time is > required, the maintainer is required to request an extension from the BIP > author, who may then elect to force an immediate decision (risking a no), > or choosing to allow more time. Again, for the last time: Bitcoin Core maintainer does not decide about protocol or consensus level changes. This is not a role for me. Find someone else, if you think you need an arbiter. There was an idea about a Bitcoin Standards Body once, but as far as I know that's not actively being worked on. BTW: for more exposure a proposal is better posted as a new thread, not as a deep reply to an existing topic. Wladimir