📅 Original date posted:2022-04-26
📝 Original message:"The only 3 nacks"...I would not call that an accurate "collection of
feedback". Feedback is always more positive when you laregely chose to
ignore any negative feedback, isn't it?
"Largely, the formal critiques of CTV (the 3 NACKs) are based on topics of
whether or not to swing the racquet, not if we should be at the ball. "
I would comment on this point, but I'm not sure I'm "technical enough". I
have to admit: I've never played tennis.
Besides, I'm pretty sure any feedback I give would be ignored.
Following the tennis analogy, one could think Jeremy is trying to win this
match the way Nadal won Djokovich in Australia in 2021 (ie by doing
everything in his hand to make sure his opponent wasn't even allowed to
play, ie not by playing fair nor by playing better than the opppnent).
"Activation parameters like in taproot".
If this was a tennis match, then I would have some sort of ability to slow
time down or something, because I've been seeing this ball slowly coming
since taproot's activation parameters were discussed.
It feels a little bit "deja vu" too. Was ever a controversial hardfork
attempted "just with the same activation mechanism as the last softfork"?
I should look for the exact words, I guess.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 23:45 Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> The latest I'm hearing (this mailing list appears to be being bypassed in
> favor of personal blogs and messaging apps) is that Speedy Trial miner
> signaling for the contentious CTV soft fork is no longer going to start on
> May 5th (as previously communicated [1]) and may instead now start around
> August 1st 2022.
>
> Hence for now the drama seems to have been averted. I am deeply skeptical
> that in the next 3 months this soft fork activation attempt will obtain
> community consensus and will no longer be contentious (although I guess
> theoretically it is possible). As a result I suspect we'll be in the exact
> same situation with a URSF effort required 2-3 months down the line.
>
> If we are I'll try to keep the mailing list informed. It is important
> there is transparency and ample time to research and prepare before making
> decisions on what software to run. Obviously I have no control over what
> others choose to do. Please don't be rushed into running things you don't
> understand the implications of and please only signal for a soft fork if
> you are convinced it has community consensus (what should precede signaling
> as it did for Taproot) and you are ready to activate a soft fork.
>
> [1]: https://rubin.io/bitcoin/2022/04/17/next-steps-bip119/
>
> --
> Michael Folkson
> Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com
> Keybase: michaelfolkson
> PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Saturday, April 23rd, 2022 at 11:03 AM, Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> As I said in my post:
>
> "If you care about Bitcoin's consensus rules I'd request you pay
> attention so you can make an informed view on what to run and what to
> support."
>
> Ideally everyone would come to an informed view independently.
> Unfortunately many people don't have the time to follow Bitcoin drama 24/7
> and hence struggle to separate noise from signal. In this case simple
> heuristics are better than nothing. One heuristic is to listen to those in
> the past who showed good judgment and didn't seek to misinform. Of course
> it is an imperfect heuristic. Ideally the community would be given
> sufficient time to come to an informed view independently on what software
> to run and not be rushed into making decisions. But it appears they are not
> being afforded that luxury.
>
> > I fear you risk losing respect in the community
>
> I appreciate your concern.
>
> --
> Michael Folkson
> Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com
> Keybase: michaelfolkson
> PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Saturday, April 23rd, 2022 at 6:10 AM, Billy Tetrud <
> billy.tetrud at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > assuming people pay attention and listen to the individuals who were
> trusted during that period
>
> Bitcoin is not run by a group of authorities of olde. By asking people to
> trust "those.. around in 2015-2017" you're asking people to blindly trust
> authorities. This, in my strong opinion, goes against the bitcoin ethos,
> and is an incredibly harmful way to push for your agenda. I'd very much
> recommend you reassess the way you're going about what you're trying to do.
> I fear you risk losing respect in the community by implying without any
> evidence that certain people are "taking advantage" of some situation and
> attempting "to confuse".
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 12:33 PM Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> If the next few weeks go how I fear they will it could get messy. If you
>> care about Bitcoin's consensus rules I'd request you pay attention so you
>> can make an informed view on what to run and what to support. For those of
>> you who were around in 2015-2017 you'll know what to expect. The right
>> outcome endured in 2017 and I'm sure the right outcome will endure here
>> assuming people pay attention and listen to the individuals who were
>> trusted during that period. There are always a large number of motivated
>> parties who are incentivized to break nodes off from Bitcoin and may seek
>> to take advantage of a contentious soft fork activation attempt.
>>
>> Remember that if all the information is presented to users in a clear way
>> well ahead of time then they can make their own mind up. I fear that things
>> will be made as convoluted as possible in a way intended to confuse and
>> information will be withheld until the last minute. When in doubt it is
>> generally better to rely on the status quo and tried and trusted. In this
>> case that would be Bitcoin Core. Alternative releases such as those seeking
>> to attempt to activate CTV or indeed those seeking to resist the activation
>> of CTV really should only be considered if you are informed on exactly what
>> you are running.
>>
>> If you are interested in the effort to resist the contentious soft fork
>> activation attempt of CTV please join ##ursf on Libera IRC.
>>
>> Have a good weekend. Hopefully those behind this contentious soft fork
>> activation attempt will see sense and we can go back to more productive
>> things than resisting contentious soft forks.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Folkson
>> Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com
>> Keybase: michaelfolkson
>> PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220426/3bd98b42/attachment.html>;
Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx…cl2d8
2023-06-07 23:08:14
in reply to nevent1q…spuc
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Published at
2023-06-07 23:08:14Event JSON
{
"id": "eeba1c0ecf09146f3c72a003ce283f9326af4de00ae165b546a81421bdbc7e9f",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686179294,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3dffc8c13f3b9b12f1185a7d930397986c136e11bc8baf2ee43157edc17ffd82",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"a503961ad8c4c7d25c310dcb264caad8ea206799c81b3f17ff6a509f326ee1e5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"372c316761360b4ea20f2d7e81a59363b7e45b8e945a5381c3122049c2c4b84a"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2022-04-26\n📝 Original message:\"The only 3 nacks\"...I would not call that an accurate \"collection of\nfeedback\". Feedback is always more positive when you laregely chose to\nignore any negative feedback, isn't it?\n\n\"Largely, the formal critiques of CTV (the 3 NACKs) are based on topics of\nwhether or not to swing the racquet, not if we should be at the ball. \"\n\nI would comment on this point, but I'm not sure I'm \"technical enough\". I\nhave to admit: I've never played tennis.\nBesides, I'm pretty sure any feedback I give would be ignored.\nFollowing the tennis analogy, one could think Jeremy is trying to win this\nmatch the way Nadal won Djokovich in Australia in 2021 (ie by doing\neverything in his hand to make sure his opponent wasn't even allowed to\nplay, ie not by playing fair nor by playing better than the opppnent).\n\n\"Activation parameters like in taproot\".\nIf this was a tennis match, then I would have some sort of ability to slow\ntime down or something, because I've been seeing this ball slowly coming\nsince taproot's activation parameters were discussed.\n\nIt feels a little bit \"deja vu\" too. Was ever a controversial hardfork\nattempted \"just with the same activation mechanism as the last softfork\"?\nI should look for the exact words, I guess.\n\n\nOn Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 23:45 Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e The latest I'm hearing (this mailing list appears to be being bypassed in\n\u003e favor of personal blogs and messaging apps) is that Speedy Trial miner\n\u003e signaling for the contentious CTV soft fork is no longer going to start on\n\u003e May 5th (as previously communicated [1]) and may instead now start around\n\u003e August 1st 2022.\n\u003e\n\u003e Hence for now the drama seems to have been averted. I am deeply skeptical\n\u003e that in the next 3 months this soft fork activation attempt will obtain\n\u003e community consensus and will no longer be contentious (although I guess\n\u003e theoretically it is possible). As a result I suspect we'll be in the exact\n\u003e same situation with a URSF effort required 2-3 months down the line.\n\u003e\n\u003e If we are I'll try to keep the mailing list informed. It is important\n\u003e there is transparency and ample time to research and prepare before making\n\u003e decisions on what software to run. Obviously I have no control over what\n\u003e others choose to do. Please don't be rushed into running things you don't\n\u003e understand the implications of and please only signal for a soft fork if\n\u003e you are convinced it has community consensus (what should precede signaling\n\u003e as it did for Taproot) and you are ready to activate a soft fork.\n\u003e\n\u003e [1]: https://rubin.io/bitcoin/2022/04/17/next-steps-bip119/\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e Michael Folkson\n\u003e Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com\n\u003e Keybase: michaelfolkson\n\u003e PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3\n\u003e\n\u003e ------- Original Message -------\n\u003e On Saturday, April 23rd, 2022 at 11:03 AM, Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e As I said in my post:\n\u003e\n\u003e \"If you care about Bitcoin's consensus rules I'd request you pay\n\u003e attention so you can make an informed view on what to run and what to\n\u003e support.\"\n\u003e\n\u003e Ideally everyone would come to an informed view independently.\n\u003e Unfortunately many people don't have the time to follow Bitcoin drama 24/7\n\u003e and hence struggle to separate noise from signal. In this case simple\n\u003e heuristics are better than nothing. One heuristic is to listen to those in\n\u003e the past who showed good judgment and didn't seek to misinform. Of course\n\u003e it is an imperfect heuristic. Ideally the community would be given\n\u003e sufficient time to come to an informed view independently on what software\n\u003e to run and not be rushed into making decisions. But it appears they are not\n\u003e being afforded that luxury.\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e I fear you risk losing respect in the community\n\u003e\n\u003e I appreciate your concern.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e Michael Folkson\n\u003e Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com\n\u003e Keybase: michaelfolkson\n\u003e PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3\n\u003e\n\u003e ------- Original Message -------\n\u003e On Saturday, April 23rd, 2022 at 6:10 AM, Billy Tetrud \u003c\n\u003e billy.tetrud at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e assuming people pay attention and listen to the individuals who were\n\u003e trusted during that period\n\u003e\n\u003e Bitcoin is not run by a group of authorities of olde. By asking people to\n\u003e trust \"those.. around in 2015-2017\" you're asking people to blindly trust\n\u003e authorities. This, in my strong opinion, goes against the bitcoin ethos,\n\u003e and is an incredibly harmful way to push for your agenda. I'd very much\n\u003e recommend you reassess the way you're going about what you're trying to do.\n\u003e I fear you risk losing respect in the community by implying without any\n\u003e evidence that certain people are \"taking advantage\" of some situation and\n\u003e attempting \"to confuse\".\n\u003e\n\u003e On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 12:33 PM Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e If the next few weeks go how I fear they will it could get messy. If you\n\u003e\u003e care about Bitcoin's consensus rules I'd request you pay attention so you\n\u003e\u003e can make an informed view on what to run and what to support. For those of\n\u003e\u003e you who were around in 2015-2017 you'll know what to expect. The right\n\u003e\u003e outcome endured in 2017 and I'm sure the right outcome will endure here\n\u003e\u003e assuming people pay attention and listen to the individuals who were\n\u003e\u003e trusted during that period. There are always a large number of motivated\n\u003e\u003e parties who are incentivized to break nodes off from Bitcoin and may seek\n\u003e\u003e to take advantage of a contentious soft fork activation attempt.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Remember that if all the information is presented to users in a clear way\n\u003e\u003e well ahead of time then they can make their own mind up. I fear that things\n\u003e\u003e will be made as convoluted as possible in a way intended to confuse and\n\u003e\u003e information will be withheld until the last minute. When in doubt it is\n\u003e\u003e generally better to rely on the status quo and tried and trusted. In this\n\u003e\u003e case that would be Bitcoin Core. Alternative releases such as those seeking\n\u003e\u003e to attempt to activate CTV or indeed those seeking to resist the activation\n\u003e\u003e of CTV really should only be considered if you are informed on exactly what\n\u003e\u003e you are running.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e If you are interested in the effort to resist the contentious soft fork\n\u003e\u003e activation attempt of CTV please join ##ursf on Libera IRC.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Have a good weekend. Hopefully those behind this contentious soft fork\n\u003e\u003e activation attempt will see sense and we can go back to more productive\n\u003e\u003e things than resisting contentious soft forks.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e --\n\u003e\u003e Michael Folkson\n\u003e\u003e Email: michaelfolkson at protonmail.com\n\u003e\u003e Keybase: michaelfolkson\n\u003e\u003e PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3\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\u003e\n\u003e\n\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-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220426/3bd98b42/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "fd56202e16d5c5899d9d2ffb9ecbef90b9f16e57b1be94f1d55b35338efe637a3eb7584706d6cb9cfb2a60c2adc81e43226b764b136c1f06217a89bba479ba6d"
}