path: root/68/19955e79c82d0053843573c354b08c6f0d7b10

Return-Path: <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDB485AA
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2017 16:19:23 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com
	[209.85.215.41])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 503161B2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2017 16:19:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id v186so12741500lfa.1
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 03 Feb 2017 08:19:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; 
	bh=7QeIGdCM+Zs6Xrh8PAVGn/m0LnwQmM3Go4Fl/YDD9p8=;
	b=hfU+cZhR0vzVQiF4Ml+iq+JOyFPpgqoEsUJPpT5rO4YIwow8ap3+QVn5qYiwHmPDu5
	p0CG3tJBjVRUl910wuiko0NPTTZmKVsqSF7bZ7VcP/qvefyIsbhNVQIUHZQdkLMlX7JB
	JauctzaiSiImDQgAiga4oacbzOB6bcz514HXgpYRscNYV4vcpxBo+RwcUvcvUy9wGDXa
	3Ehq500iJTk/wOlbMOF87oSc5j3tOngMw0Hdw5FJcbOmcA0LVsZrBuhnhuM2MOoLF+AA
	BPJK/UZPRjatFQvj0PcUH+ZxrzdnxFsTpLy1upuqGPoq4rQKP4V9kmDzsQiTtv6oAfnT
	Txzw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to;
	bh=7QeIGdCM+Zs6Xrh8PAVGn/m0LnwQmM3Go4Fl/YDD9p8=;
	b=oHqPMK0z3PJYQ895qG7d+blsEs8J+PPzSB27a71ft/uCvt8w+d0wTrGOuwXHHjLUIe
	7CZJ8rrwATOejNIsZ4DcDfV96RO4uvYnj5jxf/ISJpjfm2T+5C0THeNgRPNGSQy5MZgH
	F88LqhcdBGxdsB4Ex0gs6y5d9yxr81yFoqdI6C42lFJXyXDEyHn5NJMBRbzeh+NtdnBE
	aZrtJ+RO3tXvTbtmbiS7tY3JgcVSwALJAp6KRfZwpGCh6BL5DXFxpBdvED0ztKQRFwzn
	Zog1fgfGZA7S3Lx1Z2Gl6zMyyKqcxJF1xUIstWgE/m2GlbNKSjzzdyerkSBeqXuNNhpU
	cp3A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJLgTG9eiSw6W9LWXNEXcE8u1/WYmrMN5Z89YbB09HkM9qKIjGbSDC63A8j2ioL9eXiqirrZjv1mVvXtg==
X-Received: by 10.25.24.42 with SMTP id o42mr4392479lfi.113.1486138760280;
	Fri, 03 Feb 2017 08:19:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.21.92 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:19:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhdzPOC6MppMyuL6SwnoY_D829ZRs78pTF47k3rnHPjE1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGCNRJqNg9-aYG62OxTz5RJyx+JJkx-kt2odooZWs92f5teZiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<201702030024.10232.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAGLBAhdzPOC6MppMyuL6SwnoY_D829ZRs78pTF47k3rnHPjE1A@mail.gmail.com>
From: alp alp <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:19:19 -0600
Message-ID: <CAMBsKS9Jmah6jc-pYNNOmJSJS+mHSJ9PchWnQ=BixX0C-hg4ig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114057c2e4c0730547a2a4a9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, 
	RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 17:00:46 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Community Consensus Voting System
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:19:24 -0000

--001a114057c2e4c0730547a2a4a9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This proposal seems hopelessly broken.

Who decides on which companies are eligible?  Is there some kind of
centralized database that one registers?  Who administers this?  What is to
stop someone from creating a million fake companies to sway the voting?
How does a company make it's vote?  How does one verify that the person
voting on behalf of a company is actually the correct person?



On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> There are two ideas here for "on-chain" voting, both of which require
> changes to the software.  I agree with David that on-chain solutions
> complicate things.  Both proposals can be effected without any software
> changes:
>
> Those who wish to use proof of stake can provide a service for making
> vanity addresses containing some indicator of the proposal to be supporte=
d
> - 1bigblock or 12mbblk or whatever - based on a supporter-provided secret
> key, and then supporters can move their bitcoin into their own vanity
> address and then whoever wants to can create a website to display the
> matching addresses and explain that this is the financial power in the
> hands of supporters and how to add your "financial power vote."
>
> Those who simply want to "buy votes" can use their funds in marketing
> efforts to promote the proposal they support.
>
> This second method, of course, can be abused.  The first actually require=
s
> people to control bitcoin in order to represent support.  Counting actual=
,
> real people is still a technology in its infancy, and I don't think I wan=
t
> to see it progress much. People are not units, but individuals, and their
> value only becomes correlated to their net worth after they've been alive
> for many years, and even then, some of the best people have died paupers.
> If bitcoin-discuss got more traffic, I think this discussion would be
> better had on that list.
>
> notplato
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Strongly disagree with buying "votes", or portraying open standards as a
>> voting process. Also, this depends on address reuse, so it's fundamental=
ly
>> flawed in design.
>>
>> Some way for people to express their support weighed by coins (without
>> losing/spending them), and possibly weighed by running a full node, migh=
t
>> still be desirable. The most straightforward way to do this is to suppor=
t
>> message signatures somehow (ideally without using the same pubkey as
>> spending), and some [inherently unreliable, but perhaps useful if the
>> community "colludes" to not-cheat] way to sign with ones' full node.
>>
>> Note also that the BIP process already has BIP Comments for leaving
>> textual
>> opinions on the BIP unrelated to stake. See BIP 2 for details on that.
>>
>> Luke
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 02, 2017 7:39:51 PM t. khan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > - t.k.
>> >
>> > ----------------------
>> > BIP: ?
>> > Layer: Process
>> > Title: Community Consensus Voting System
>> > Author: t.khan <teekhan42@gmail.com>
>> > Comments-Summary: No comments yet.
>> > Comments-URI: TBD
>> > Status: Draft
>> > Type: Standards Track
>> > Created: 2017-02-02
>> > License: BSD-2
>> > Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDGDTmZvkE5Uuwh8  (just an example,
>> don=E2=80=99t
>> > send to this!)
>> >
>> > Abstract
>> > Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS) will allow developers to
>> measure
>> > support for BIPs prior to implementation.
>> >
>> > Motivation
>> > We currently have no way of measuring consensus for potential changes =
to
>> > the Bitcoin protocol. This is especially problematic for controversial
>> > changes such as the max block size limit. As a result, we have many
>> > proposed solutions but no clear direction.
>> >
>> > Also, due to our lack of ability to measure consensus, there is a
>> general
>> > feeling among many in the community that developers aren=E2=80=99t lis=
tening to
>> > their concerns. This is a valid complaint, as it=E2=80=99s not possibl=
e to
>> listen
>> > to thousands of voices all shouting different things in a crowded
>> > room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the Bitcoin community today.
>> >
>> > The CCVS will allow the general public, miners, companies using Bitcoi=
n,
>> > and developers to vote for their preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99s=
 public
>> and
>> > relatively difficult (expensive) to manipulate.
>> >
>> > Specification
>> > Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is
>> added
>> > to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by
>> > sending a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP's address.
>> Each
>> > transaction counts as 1 vote.
>> >
>> > Confirmed Vote Multiplier:
>> > Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core maintainers/contributo=
rs
>> > are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is worth 10,000x=
 a
>> > regular vote.
>> >
>> > For example:
>> >
>> > Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then states public=
ly
>> > (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails the URL t=
o
>> the
>> > admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will count as 10,0=
00
>> > votes.
>> >
>> > Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitFury, etc., all do the same.
>> >
>> > Confirmed votes would be added to a new section in each respective BIP
>> as a
>> > public record.
>> >
>> > Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a particular
>> block
>> > number is mined.
>> >
>> >
>> > Rationale
>> > Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twofold; it gives a
>> > larger voice to organizations and the people who will have to do the
>> work
>> > to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will negate th=
e
>> > effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedly.
>> >
>> > Definitions
>> > Miner: any individual or organization that has mined at least one vali=
d
>> > block in the last 2016 blocks.
>> >
>> > Company using Bitcoin: any organization using Bitcoin for financial,
>> asset
>> > or other purposes, with either under development and released solution=
s.
>> >
>> > Developer: any individual who has or had commit access, and any
>> individual
>> > who has authored a BIP
>> >
>> > Unresolved Issues
>> > Node voting: It would be desirable for any full node running an
>> up-to-date
>> > blockchain to also be able to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But =
as
>> > this would require code changes, it is outside the scope of this BIP.
>> >
>> > Copyright
>> > This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license.
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
> techie?
> I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
> <http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
> I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com>
> which now accepts Bitcoin.
> I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
> "He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
> Nakamoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--001a114057c2e4c0730547a2a4a9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>This proposal seems hopelessly broken.</div><div><br>=
</div>Who decides on which companies are eligible?=C2=A0 Is there some kind=
 of centralized database that one registers?=C2=A0 Who administers this?=C2=
=A0 What is to stop someone from creating a million fake companies to sway =
the voting?=C2=A0 How does a company make it&#39;s vote?=C2=A0 How does one=
 verify that the person voting on behalf of a company is actually the corre=
ct person?<div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7=
:32 PM, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailt=
o:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@list=
s.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_q=
uote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1e=
x"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>There are two ideas here for &quot;on-ch=
ain&quot; voting, both of which require changes to the software.=C2=A0 I ag=
ree with David that on-chain solutions complicate things.=C2=A0 Both propos=
als can be effected without any software changes:<br><br>Those who wish to =
use proof of stake can provide a service for making vanity addresses contai=
ning some indicator of the proposal to be supported - 1bigblock or 12mbblk =
or whatever - based on a supporter-provided secret key, and then supporters=
 can move their bitcoin into their own vanity address and then whoever want=
s to can create a website to display the matching addresses and explain tha=
t this is the financial power in the hands of supporters and how to add you=
r &quot;financial power vote.&quot;<br><br></div>Those who simply want to &=
quot;buy votes&quot; can use their funds in marketing efforts to promote th=
e proposal they support.<br><br></div>This second method, of course, can be=
 abused.=C2=A0 The first actually requires people to control bitcoin in ord=
er to represent support.=C2=A0 Counting actual, real people is still a tech=
nology in its infancy, and I don&#39;t think I want to see it progress much=
. People are not units, but individuals, and their value only becomes corre=
lated to their net worth after they&#39;ve been alive for many years, and e=
ven then, some of the best people have died paupers. If bitcoin-discuss got=
 more traffic, I think this discussion would be better had on that list.<br=
><br></div>notplato<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><div class=3D"=
h5"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Luke Das=
hjr via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lis=
ts.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfound=
ation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Strongly=
 disagree with buying &quot;votes&quot;, or portraying open standards as a<=
br>
voting process. Also, this depends on address reuse, so it&#39;s fundamenta=
lly<br>
flawed in design.<br>
<br>
Some way for people to express their support weighed by coins (without<br>
losing/spending them), and possibly weighed by running a full node, might<b=
r>
still be desirable. The most straightforward way to do this is to support<b=
r>
message signatures somehow (ideally without using the same pubkey as<br>
spending), and some [inherently unreliable, but perhaps useful if the<br>
community &quot;colludes&quot; to not-cheat] way to sign with ones&#39; ful=
l node.<br>
<br>
Note also that the BIP process already has BIP Comments for leaving textual=
<br>
opinions on the BIP unrelated to stake. See BIP 2 for details on that.<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
<div><div class=3D"m_7954997659320911193h5"><br>
<br>
On Thursday, February 02, 2017 7:39:51 PM t. khan via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br=
>
&gt; Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Thanks,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - t.k.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; ----------------------<br>
&gt; BIP: ?<br>
&gt; Layer: Process<br>
&gt; Title: Community Consensus Voting System<br>
&gt; Author: t.khan &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:teekhan42@gmail.com" target=3D"_b=
lank">teekhan42@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; Comments-Summary: No comments yet.<br>
&gt; Comments-URI: TBD<br>
&gt; Status: Draft<br>
&gt; Type: Standards Track<br>
&gt; Created: 2017-02-02<br>
&gt; License: BSD-2<br>
&gt; Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDGDTmZvkE5U<wbr>uwh8=C2=A0 (just an=
 example, don=E2=80=99t<br>
&gt; send to this!)<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Abstract<br>
&gt; Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS) will allow developers to meas=
ure<br>
&gt; support for BIPs prior to implementation.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Motivation<br>
&gt; We currently have no way of measuring consensus for potential changes =
to<br>
&gt; the Bitcoin protocol. This is especially problematic for controversial=
<br>
&gt; changes such as the max block size limit. As a result, we have many<br=
>
&gt; proposed solutions but no clear direction.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Also, due to our lack of ability to measure consensus, there is a gene=
ral<br>
&gt; feeling among many in the community that developers aren=E2=80=99t lis=
tening to<br>
&gt; their concerns. This is a valid complaint, as it=E2=80=99s not possibl=
e to listen<br>
&gt; to thousands of voices all shouting different things in a crowded<br>
&gt; room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the Bitcoin community today.<b=
r>
&gt;<br>
&gt; The CCVS will allow the general public, miners, companies using Bitcoi=
n,<br>
&gt; and developers to vote for their preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99s=
 public and<br>
&gt; relatively difficult (expensive) to manipulate.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Specification<br>
&gt; Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is =
added<br>
&gt; to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by<b=
r>
&gt; sending a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP&#39;s addre=
ss. Each<br>
&gt; transaction counts as 1 vote.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Confirmed Vote Multiplier:<br>
&gt; Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core maintainers/contributo=
rs<br>
&gt; are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is worth 10,000x=
 a<br>
&gt; regular vote.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; For example:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then states public=
ly<br>
&gt; (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails the URL t=
o the<br>
&gt; admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will count as 10,0=
00<br>
&gt; votes.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitFury, etc., all do the same.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Confirmed votes would be added to a new section in each respective BIP=
 as a<br>
&gt; public record.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a particular bl=
ock<br>
&gt; number is mined.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Rationale<br>
&gt; Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twofold; it gives a=
<br>
&gt; larger voice to organizations and the people who will have to do the w=
ork<br>
&gt; to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will negate th=
e<br>
&gt; effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedly.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Definitions<br>
&gt; Miner: any individual or organization that has mined at least one vali=
d<br>
&gt; block in the last 2016 blocks.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Company using Bitcoin: any organization using Bitcoin for financial, a=
sset<br>
&gt; or other purposes, with either under development and released solution=
s.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Developer: any individual who has or had commit access, and any indivi=
dual<br>
&gt; who has authored a BIP<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Unresolved Issues<br>
&gt; Node voting: It would be desirable for any full node running an up-to-=
date<br>
&gt; blockchain to also be able to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But =
as<br>
&gt; this would require code changes, it is outside the scope of this BIP.<=
br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Copyright<br>
&gt; This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license.<br>
</div></div>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br></div></div><span class=3D"HOE=
nZb"><font color=3D"#888888">-- <br><div class=3D"m_7954997659320911193gmai=
l_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr">I like to =
provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a techie?=C2=
=A0 <br>I own <a href=3D"http://www.litmocracy.com" target=3D"_blank">Litmo=
cracy</a> and <a href=3D"http://www.memeracing.net" target=3D"_blank">Meme =
Racing</a> (in alpha). <br>I&#39;m the webmaster for <a href=3D"http://www.=
voluntaryist.com" target=3D"_blank">The Voluntaryist</a> which now accepts =
Bitcoin.<br>I also code for <a href=3D"http://dollarvigilante.com/" target=
=3D"_blank">The Dollar Vigilante</a>.<br>&quot;He ought to find it more pro=
fitable to play by the rules&quot; - Satoshi Nakamoto</div></div>
</font></span></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a114057c2e4c0730547a2a4a9--