Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E40225A for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:37:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193CA1A0 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:37:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [2001:470:5:265:a45d:823b:2d27:961c] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:a45d:823b:2d27:961c]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D396338ABD71; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:37:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:180816:lautaro.dragan@gmail.com::XE2k8S=YItryGbqa:Yaeo X-Hashcash: 1:25:180816:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::6AcyIAlc=qiFhCPs:ck1+n X-Hashcash: 1:25:180816:ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com::J18OhjQPcHcKRUc9:atwLP From: Luke Dashjr To: lautaro.dragan@gmail.com Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:37:11 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20100827.1168748) References: <201808160106.54960.luke@dashjr.org> In-Reply-To: X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="cp 874" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201808160237.12395.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:37:53 -0000 On Thursday 16 August 2018 02:22:21 Lautaro Dragan wrote: > > Choosing not to mine transactions is not censorship. > > Is it not, if for political rather than economical reasons? These > transactions pay fees like any other. Miners have always chosen transaction on "political" basises, and doing such is their right. That's why the system is supposed to be comprised of many miners, all with their own policies - so the choices of one do not impact the overall ability to spend (presumably only spam should be rejected by all miners). For fees to themselves justify the cost of a transaction, they would need to be magnitudes higher than we've ever seen on Bitcoin. But even then, nobody has an obligation to accept payment, no matter how reasonable it is, for a service they don't want to provide. Luke