From: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Chris Stewart <chris@suredbits.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:49:38 +0200
Message-ID: <2003815.trufugliNn@strawberry>
In-Reply-To: <CAGL6+mEnGNdAggHZs=ZM_QHbts63exE1ydstK+w-gUnm=4JLTA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGL6+mEnGNdAggHZs=ZM_QHbts63exE1ydstK+w-gUnm=4JLTA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Requirement for pseudonymous BIP submissions
Precedence: list

On Saturday, 18 March 2017 16:23:16 CEST Chris Stewart via bitcoin-dev=20
wrote:
> As everyone in the Bitcoin space knows, there is a massive scaling debate
> going on. One side wants to increase the block size via segwit, while the
> other side wants to increase via hard fork. I have strong opinions on the
> topic but I won=E2=80=99t discuss them here. The point of the matter is w=
e are
> seeing the politicization of protocol level changes.

I agree with your assessment, the sides are political and picking sides=20
makes people a target.
=46or that reason I know that many companies are not picking sides, we=E2=
=80=99ve seen=20
some bad stuff happen to companies that did.

I=E2=80=99m not convnced it makes sense to use anonymous, but provable, ide=
ntities=20
is the way to solve this. Though.

I also don=E2=80=99t believe people are rejecting proposals purely based on=
 the=20
name. What I see is that pratically all proposals are ignored for the time=
=20
being becaues we can=E2=80=99t make any changes anyway until we have made a=
 protocol=20
upgrade and came out stronger.
I do agree that bips are seen politically, but not based on the person that=
=20
suggests them, but more based on the content being useful for their=20
political side.

I am not entirely against pseudonymous submissions, but in that case I thin=
k=20
it should be carried by a well known member of the Bitcoin community.

This raises the bar somewhat to a point where you have to convince someone=
=20
that is already publicly known to propose it with you.
=2D-=20
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel