1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
|
Return-Path: <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D834168
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:25:44 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-yk0-f170.google.com (mail-yk0-f170.google.com
[209.85.160.170])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86D61112
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ykbi184 with SMTP id i184so119543961ykb.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=qAhjfLh3qbCApRxIXqX293zyPmUHFWVDV/Gj/3LYwv4=;
b=GDDN1AcpETELkRjegLlh65uWjBmHjHvOE8XY+ibhPORQTlS5F3p7e7h4IRhkgV+6Hd
IWq2ZyHVcymfPeuR2h7bxcTqpRGtB3zPktM/sSQL5QIL5SwvcLNcp1KMIHYR3T7OVzs2
tzRhAmtyzj/fGZ/X52kGOLp8ribg5vlze4gYUDkLYxZ2XZDSZZ3ySa8V4b0GLZnh0lTF
o380PSX7o5jtkA9qMFOIHyTrC0KVMo5UHP8SzVX5iIEhYXRvAlLU2+K2Uc7jlFR1n1NF
dmmT9tP/GIf8s5cxukAXLmc8uiYhwWhxURtL9j/ctNBYmkvvnv+yNUMzAe7n3e4gBAEd
qVnA==
X-Received: by 10.170.77.197 with SMTP id t188mr12268723ykt.78.1439972742680;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.94.132 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:25:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 09:25:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CADJgMztwZRNMQ62kLZ6MN1LPYH8dTVLkYMKRtEAh3v8+mU6xQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Micha Bailey <michabailey@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a8c36d0546f051da5c7c8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM,
HK_RANDOM_FROM,
HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT Fork
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:25:45 -0000
--001a113a8c36d0546f051da5c7c8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I see no problem with Satoshi returning to participate in peer review.
Bitcoin development has long since migrated from a single authority figure
to a system of technical peer review consensus. What is more of a problem
is this list has degenerated to a generalised discussion forum where any
academic or technical debate is drowned out by noise.
I joined this list so I keep be abreast of bitcoin's technical development
and proposals. I am sure many ecosystem stakeholders and participants also
once used this list to keep abreast of technical developments and academic
research. It would be splendid indeed if we could return to some semblance
of decorum that once existed.
Do you think we could have a "bitcoin-discuss" list where specifically
non-technical discussion can happen leaving this list for more academic and
technical debate together with setting a clear mandate about what is on
topic for this list?
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Micha Bailey via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> My interpretation is that he's saying Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to
> return as Satoshi, because whatever he did/said would inevitably end up
> being treated with authority, which shouldn't be the case.
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Warren Togami Jr. via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> I honestly don't understand your position, but I get the sense that you
>> are suggesting Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to return if he wanted to be
>> active in development again?
>>
>> Warren
>> On Aug 17, 2015 1:38 PM, "Oliver Egginger" <bitcoin@olivere.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 17.08.2015 um 21:03 schrieb Warren Togami Jr.:
>>> > This bitcoin-dev list restarted with an empty subscriber list on June
>>> > 21st, 2015. So whoever posted from satoshi@vistomail.com
>>> > <mailto:satoshi@vistomail.com> subscribed and verified the address
>>> > recently. Do you propose that we manually approve new subscribers to
>>> > prevent these kind of "abuses" as you put it?
>>>
>>> I would simply block the creators old email addresses. Easy with
>>> Mailman. I thought that would be a good and easy approach, but maybe I'm
>>> wrong.
>>>
>>> Some believes it is possible that the email could be genuine. Some say
>>> that only the content is important. I have closely followed. An
>>> interesting discussion. Thank you all so far.
>>>
>>> But let's say the poster would be the real Satoshi. Would we discuss his
>>> posting if he would not claim to be Satoshi? There are a lot of smart
>>> people on this list, which publish occasionally quite useful ideas. But
>>> much of this is hardly the subject of greater discussion. Especially not
>>> when it comes to the blocksize. On this subject almost everything has
>>> been already said. But not yet by everyone. Especially not by Satoshi.
>>>
>>> Satoshi would have a decisive influence on the community. I'm sure. To
>>> say it does not matter who's talking is maybe genteelly but a little bit
>>> remote from everyday life. Or not? Satoshi is the creator. What he says
>>> is in the newspaper and is perceived by all. If he says it's okay to do
>>> nothing as long as we stand together, then people have the courage to do
>>> maybe something dangerous or something wrong. Then people only follow
>>> their hearts. Otherwise they follow their fear. It is a paradox of the
>>> human nature that some type of Dictatorship can make you free. I say
>>> some type, not any type. Enough said.
>>>
>>> - oliver
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--001a113a8c36d0546f051da5c7c8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I see no problem with Satoshi returning to participate in =
peer review. Bitcoin development has long since migrated from a single auth=
ority figure to a system of technical peer review consensus. What is more o=
f a problem is this list has degenerated to a generalised discussion forum =
where any academic or technical debate is drowned out by noise.<div><br></d=
iv><div>I joined this list so I keep be abreast of bitcoin's technical =
development and proposals. I am sure many ecosystem stakeholders and partic=
ipants also once used this list to keep abreast of technical developments a=
nd academic research. It would be splendid indeed if we could return to som=
e semblance of decorum that once existed.</div><div><br></div><div>Do you t=
hink we could have a "bitcoin-discuss" list where specifically no=
n-technical discussion can happen leaving this list for more academic and t=
echnical debate together with setting a clear mandate about what is on topi=
c for this list?</div><div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Micha Bailey via bitc=
oin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoun=
dation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>>=
</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .=
8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">My interpretation is that =
he's saying Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to return as Satoshi, becau=
se whatever he did/said would inevitably end up being treated with authorit=
y, which shouldn't be the case.<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">=
<span></span><br><br>On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Warren Togami Jr. via bit=
coin-dev <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" targe=
t=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr">I honestly don't understand you=
r position, but I get the sense that you are suggesting Satoshi wouldn'=
t be welcome to return if he wanted to be active in development again?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Warren</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Aug 17, 2015 1:38 PM, "Oliver Egginger&q=
uot; <<a>bitcoin@olivere.de</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #cc=
c solid;padding-left:1ex">Am 17.08.2015 um 21:03 schrieb Warren Togami Jr.:=
<br>
> This bitcoin-dev list restarted with an empty subscriber list on June<=
br>
> 21st, 2015.=C2=A0 So whoever posted from <a>satoshi@vistomail.com</a><=
br>
> <mailto:<a>satoshi@vistomail.com</a>> subscribed and verified th=
e address<br>
> recently.=C2=A0 Do you propose that we manually approve new subscriber=
s to<br>
> prevent these kind of "abuses" as you put it?<br>
<br>
I would simply block the creators old email addresses. Easy with<br>
Mailman. I thought that would be a good and easy approach, but maybe I'=
m<br>
wrong.<br>
<br>
Some believes it is possible that the email could be genuine. Some say<br>
that only the content is important. I have closely followed. An<br>
interesting discussion. Thank you all so far.<br>
<br>
But let's say the poster would be the real Satoshi. Would we discuss hi=
s<br>
posting if he would not claim to be Satoshi? There are a lot of smart<br>
people on this list, which publish occasionally quite useful ideas. But<br>
much of this is hardly the subject of greater discussion. Especially not<br=
>
when it comes to the blocksize. On this subject almost everything has<br>
been already said. But not yet by everyone. Especially not by Satoshi.<br>
<br>
Satoshi would have a decisive influence on the community. I'm sure. To<=
br>
say it does not matter who's talking is maybe genteelly but a little bi=
t<br>
remote from everyday life. Or not? Satoshi is the creator. What he says<br>
is in the newspaper and is perceived by all. If he says it's okay to do=
<br>
nothing as long as we stand together, then people have the courage to do<br=
>
maybe something dangerous or something wrong. Then people only follow<br>
their hearts. Otherwise they follow their fear. It is a paradox of the<br>
human nature that some type of Dictatorship can make you free. I say<br>
some type, not any type. Enough said.<br>
<br>
- oliver<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--001a113a8c36d0546f051da5c7c8--
|
