blob: b4393f6108bb6cb22c332234f5cd7326be094c7a (
plain)
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
|
Return-Path: <milly@bitcoins.info>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6A901ADF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 5 Oct 2015 23:06:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail.help.org (mail.help.org [70.90.2.18])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 450D112D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 5 Oct 2015 23:06:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.1.10.25] (Unknown [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA
; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 19:06:05 -0400
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CAKzdR-rPoByn=+CgsTc1ZnLkjwtYyJnbQLbn-VHOvz0dLciefQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKSNa3TWgHXrp3=3gXdAbE6vVjW_uzus3_2YG9gzKJSskg@mail.gmail.com>
<5612ACF3.2080006@gmail.com>
<5570C084-0C2D-4B79-A78E-B25699600EA9@gmx.com>
<CADJgMzscJZZ_k19KN67UC9gYM_3J-serKNPVq_gro4-85exL3A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info>
Message-ID: <5613024F.7010309@bitcoins.info>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 19:05:51 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzscJZZ_k19KN67UC9gYM_3J-serKNPVq_gro4-85exL3A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork
technical debate
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: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 23:06:09 -0000
On 10/5/2015 6:56 PM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> There is no development gridlock. Look at the IRC logs for core-dev;
> Please desist from this intellectual dishonesty and toxicity.
A system where anyone can veto a change promotes gridlock. Most people
not on the devlpoment team see the block size debate as "gridlock."
Much like "spam" "attack" and "decentralized" everyone has their own
definition so arguing over it is generally pointless.
Russ
|
