MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <RyYBRY3MJP_0b2YkCEUFBdP8u1A_cGSEEkDbzKK9k-rkINZrBaOL70L96iHR11bJhmkhAzuN6uZ1X8PQgz2wa8Us3-2OpNa4RbhSSprw_WE=@protonmail.com>
 <CALeFGL1=4PrA_ziTsoS9sUjGjfLr54AiMfM99uDV-Bau5Ab_eQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ4-pEADrHf_YR5ZBfJW+eefKrp1iEj4wAi72UrwRSi9gaVP+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <B037C028-EB25-4197-A0F1-48838D1AD30F@petertodd.org>
 <tBEO_7gKqAlgiRpjC1OCLMBcLddK0ffNlbdU65VhXnXqZQiDCTDNOw8sfTXqNXZxVA8wA0uodTLvptt7Iy5O3D_6hkiVVfLegOrg9C1Snkg=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <tBEO_7gKqAlgiRpjC1OCLMBcLddK0ffNlbdU65VhXnXqZQiDCTDNOw8sfTXqNXZxVA8wA0uodTLvptt7Iy5O3D_6hkiVVfLegOrg9C1Snkg=@protonmail.com>
From: Zac Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:06:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJ4-pEB1zWxWapt3qit=X1p3WuSSn2_K=rygDp8JzpS7GimgMg@mail.gmail.com>
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bce09f05dd76e373"
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] User Resisted Soft Fork for CTV
Precedence: list

--000000000000bce09f05dd76e373
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 at 07:36, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote

CTV *can* benefit layer 2 users, which is why I switched from vaguely
> apathetic to CTV, to vaguely supportive of it.


Other proposals exist that also benefit L2 solutions. What makes you
support CTV specifically?

Centrally documenting the implications of each side by side and point by
point might be a useful next step. This would enable a larger part of the
community to understand each proposal and may reduce repetition and
misunderstandings on this list.

Once a common understanding of the implications of each proposal is in
place, their tradeoffs can be considered, facilitating creating consensus
on which proposal benefits a maximum of users.

Zac

--000000000000bce09f05dd76e373
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto">On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 at 07:36, ZmnSCPxj &lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com">ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com</a>&gt; wrote</div><di=
v dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;bo=
rder-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)" =
dir=3D"auto">CTV *can* benefit layer 2 users, which is why I switched from =
vaguely apathetic to CTV, to vaguely supportive of it.</blockquote><div dir=
=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Other proposals exist that also benef=
it L2 solutions. What makes you support CTV specifically?</div><div dir=3D"=
auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Centrally documenting the implications of=
 each side by side and point by point might be a useful next step. This wou=
ld enable a larger part of the community to understand each proposal and ma=
y reduce repetition and misunderstandings on this list.</div><div dir=3D"au=
to"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Once a common understanding of the implicat=
ions of each proposal is in place, their tradeoffs can be considered, facil=
itating creating consensus on which proposal benefits a maximum of users.</=
div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Zac</div><div dir=3D"auto=
">=C2=A0<br></div></div></div>

--000000000000bce09f05dd76e373--