📅 Original date posted:2015-08-19
📝 Original message: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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at vistomail.com
>>> > <mailto:satoshi at 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 at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150819/f49ea8d0/attachment.html>;
Btc Drak [ARCHIVE] /
npub1lh…zg7ed
2023-06-07 15:47:30
in reply to nevent1q…pth2
Author Public Key
npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7edPublished at
2023-06-07 15:47:30Event JSON
{
"id": "33eae822884d74356ad0a5263b370bb34ec285a58926f87468adc044aec64362",
"pubkey": "fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83",
"created_at": 1686152850,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c2ea875b0594d5635a2a5ab9721c10059f40c62d11975dcc679e649aa5cf3f34",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"2ddf368339608655871c4ae2b29706b919863ba9010c2ce541090d2327a474ed",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a384795310cea1937dda4d01ee8f14ca734b9a7ab60c62114a5656706e15e47f"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-19\n📝 Original message:I see no problem with Satoshi returning to participate in peer review.\nBitcoin development has long since migrated from a single authority figure\nto a system of technical peer review consensus. What is more of a problem\nis this list has degenerated to a generalised discussion forum where any\nacademic or technical debate is drowned out by noise.\n\nI joined this list so I keep be abreast of bitcoin's technical development\nand proposals. I am sure many ecosystem stakeholders and participants also\nonce used this list to keep abreast of technical developments and academic\nresearch. It would be splendid indeed if we could return to some semblance\nof decorum that once existed.\n\nDo you think we could have a \"bitcoin-discuss\" list where specifically\nnon-technical discussion can happen leaving this list for more academic and\ntechnical debate together with setting a clear mandate about what is on\ntopic for this list?\n\n\nOn Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Micha Bailey via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e My interpretation is that he's saying Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to\n\u003e return as Satoshi, because whatever he did/said would inevitably end up\n\u003e being treated with authority, which shouldn't be the case.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Warren Togami Jr. via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e I honestly don't understand your position, but I get the sense that you\n\u003e\u003e are suggesting Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to return if he wanted to be\n\u003e\u003e active in development again?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Warren\n\u003e\u003e On Aug 17, 2015 1:38 PM, \"Oliver Egginger\" \u003cbitcoin at olivere.de\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Am 17.08.2015 um 21:03 schrieb Warren Togami Jr.:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e This bitcoin-dev list restarted with an empty subscriber list on June\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e 21st, 2015. So whoever posted from satoshi at vistomail.com\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e \u003cmailto:satoshi at vistomail.com\u003e subscribed and verified the address\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e recently. Do you propose that we manually approve new subscribers to\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e prevent these kind of \"abuses\" as you put it?\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e I would simply block the creators old email addresses. Easy with\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Mailman. I thought that would be a good and easy approach, but maybe I'm\n\u003e\u003e\u003e wrong.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Some believes it is possible that the email could be genuine. Some say\n\u003e\u003e\u003e that only the content is important. I have closely followed. An\n\u003e\u003e\u003e interesting discussion. Thank you all so far.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e But let's say the poster would be the real Satoshi. Would we discuss his\n\u003e\u003e\u003e posting if he would not claim to be Satoshi? There are a lot of smart\n\u003e\u003e\u003e people on this list, which publish occasionally quite useful ideas. But\n\u003e\u003e\u003e much of this is hardly the subject of greater discussion. Especially not\n\u003e\u003e\u003e when it comes to the blocksize. On this subject almost everything has\n\u003e\u003e\u003e been already said. But not yet by everyone. Especially not by Satoshi.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Satoshi would have a decisive influence on the community. I'm sure. To\n\u003e\u003e\u003e say it does not matter who's talking is maybe genteelly but a little bit\n\u003e\u003e\u003e remote from everyday life. Or not? Satoshi is the creator. What he says\n\u003e\u003e\u003e is in the newspaper and is perceived by all. If he says it's okay to do\n\u003e\u003e\u003e nothing as long as we stand together, then people have the courage to do\n\u003e\u003e\u003e maybe something dangerous or something wrong. Then people only follow\n\u003e\u003e\u003e their hearts. Otherwise they follow their fear. It is a paradox of the\n\u003e\u003e\u003e human nature that some type of Dictatorship can make you free. I say\n\u003e\u003e\u003e some type, not any type. Enough said.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e - oliver\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150819/f49ea8d0/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "e3fdcccf462d245afd458ff15ad5ed0347cbb210864c527b8bc5cb84ddf28e10807686029f40635707fd77980a074f0876fbe316b3e407857cd15400304a751a"
}