📅 Original date posted:2016-02-02
📝 Original message:On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 09:44:48AM -0800, Toby Padilla via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I really don't like the idea of policing other people's use of the
> protocol. If a transaction pays its fee and has a greater than dust value,
> it makes no sense to object to it.
I'll point out that getting a BIP for a feature is *not* a hard
requirement for deployment. I'd encourage you to go write up your BIP
document, give it a non-numerical name for ease of reference, and lobby
wallet vendors to implement it.
While I'll refrain from commenting on whether or not I think the feature
itself is a good idea, I really don't want people to get the impression
that we're gatekeepers for how people choose use Bitcoin.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000008320874843f282f554aa2436290642fcfa81e5a01d78698
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 650 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160202/6ed32172/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2…a2np2
2023-06-07 17:48:25
in reply to nevent1q…gn9q
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 17:48:25Event JSON
{
"id": "c0900b701a23bcadcac5dad7b95bb64e6b5df81d1c5e760443467108851262c9",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686160105,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e6ad981b1892ac87a5c86fa13a75e0b0a362e90adcdcbc91667d3a8c4dc867cc",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-02-02\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 09:44:48AM -0800, Toby Padilla via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I really don't like the idea of policing other people's use of the\n\u003e protocol. If a transaction pays its fee and has a greater than dust value,\n\u003e it makes no sense to object to it.\n\nI'll point out that getting a BIP for a feature is *not* a hard\nrequirement for deployment. I'd encourage you to go write up your BIP\ndocument, give it a non-numerical name for ease of reference, and lobby\nwallet vendors to implement it.\n\nWhile I'll refrain from commenting on whether or not I think the feature\nitself is a good idea, I really don't want people to get the impression\nthat we're gatekeepers for how people choose use Bitcoin.\n\n-- \nhttps://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n000000000000000008320874843f282f554aa2436290642fcfa81e5a01d78698\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 650 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160202/6ed32172/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "6a6653410c64f1597e2a903c87c875afc4be8ecd7b3616368ba3708b23e967fb482edb7f8f577a6c6c6cc261e16453d93e2299632573693e97cf6376c20ab752"
}