📅 Original date posted:2015-12-29
📝 Original message:I suggest we use short-circuit evaluation. If someone complains, we figure it out as we go, maybe depending on the nature of the complaint. If nobody complains, we get it done faster.
We're humans. We have the ability to respond to novel conditions without relying on predetermined rules and algorithms. I suggest we use that ability sometimes.
On Dec 29, 2015, at 4:55 AM, jl2012 <jl2012 at xbt.hk> wrote:
> What if someone complains? We can't even tell whether a complaint is legit or just trolling. That's why I think we need some general consensus rules which is not written in code, but as a social contract. Breaking those rules would be considered as a hardfork and is allowed only in exceptional situation.
>
> Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-12-29 07:42 寫到:
>> That sounds like a rather unlikely scenario. Unless you have a
>> specific reason to suspect that might be the case, I think we don't
>> need to worry about it too much. If we announce the intention to
>> perform such a soft fork a couple of months before the soft fork
>> becomes active, and if nobody complains about it destroying their
>> secret stash, then I think that's fair enough and we could proceed.
>> On Dec 28, 2015, at 11:47 PM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev
>> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> Do we need to consider that someone may have a timelocked big tx, with private key lost?
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151229/f1c4bd08/attachment.sig>;
Jonathan Toomim [ARCHIVE] /
npub1pl…yj0hj
2023-06-07 17:47:22
in reply to nevent1q…rf5z
Author Public Key
npub1pl6kcz00s7wgn6syh73dta0qm9sqpmtw4adv8rnm2w9fmynkw45sayj0hjPublished at
2023-06-07 17:47:22Event JSON
{
"id": "ada1006585fff770ba09cfbbba1ff7477047fa73cebf3b7173469fe4396cf210",
"pubkey": "0ff56c09ef879c89ea04bfa2d5f5e0d96000ed6eaf5ac38e7b538a9d92767569",
"created_at": 1686160042,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0600edb122b23d28de1adba7ca47e2347d6be937da11235e57408ba908190104",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3740efa9f78effc2f29a4d0a8ec4db46bd88f06a5082d62cac58aa98925232e4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"ab1c85bd5ad443631a95b228bd1630bf7acdb27f6de01a960ccfbb077831d7ec"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-12-29\n📝 Original message:I suggest we use short-circuit evaluation. If someone complains, we figure it out as we go, maybe depending on the nature of the complaint. If nobody complains, we get it done faster.\n\nWe're humans. We have the ability to respond to novel conditions without relying on predetermined rules and algorithms. I suggest we use that ability sometimes.\n\nOn Dec 29, 2015, at 4:55 AM, jl2012 \u003cjl2012 at xbt.hk\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e What if someone complains? We can't even tell whether a complaint is legit or just trolling. That's why I think we need some general consensus rules which is not written in code, but as a social contract. Breaking those rules would be considered as a hardfork and is allowed only in exceptional situation.\n\u003e \n\u003e Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-12-29 07:42 寫到:\n\u003e\u003e That sounds like a rather unlikely scenario. Unless you have a\n\u003e\u003e specific reason to suspect that might be the case, I think we don't\n\u003e\u003e need to worry about it too much. If we announce the intention to\n\u003e\u003e perform such a soft fork a couple of months before the soft fork\n\u003e\u003e becomes active, and if nobody complains about it destroying their\n\u003e\u003e secret stash, then I think that's fair enough and we could proceed.\n\u003e\u003e On Dec 28, 2015, at 11:47 PM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Do we need to consider that someone may have a timelocked big tx, with private key lost?\n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 496 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151229/f1c4bd08/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "3c98d09c5210b2da0ad6f5da2b9caf89370818895e00a7b7e4551bf13c606db9624f7b4e738ed926d5ec721ce8eeedd2af22efc8b528a68ab29f5adb67899e6d"
}