📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21
📝 Original message:My UX skills are lacking a bit. You can edit all your thoughts about each
BIP, HTML is accepted, so you can link to other posts you made somewhere
else.
When you click on a cell in the grid, it forward you to the page that the
dev edited for this BIP.
This website is not only to say "approve", "disapprove", nor is it about a
formal process for reaching agreement.
This is a tool, a portal, which educates people, and permit you to link all
of your thoughts about the various BIP and show it to others.
With the opinions browse able from the same website, you will notice in a
gleam as soon as one of those proposal reach consensus. (I think SIPA's BIP
has a chance to do so, but nobody knows it yet)
Sadly, the most controversial is a BIP, the noisier it is, at the expense
of those which are not. (like sipa's one).
It irritates me a lot that the debate in public mind is "XT or not" /
"Bigger blocks or not", when in reality there is lots of different
proposals that might also reach consensus but are lost in the noise.
I will add any BIP that at least one voter approve and want to push forward.
I plan to add merchants/wallet providers/mining pools later.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
>
>
> On 21 August 2015 02:31:51 GMT-07:00, Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
> ><bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> What might be valuable is to ask devs to explain what their threat
> >models are, what should be at the root of their thinking about the
> >blocksize.
> >
> >That's exactly what the "Technical Opinion" column is for.
>
> What if could be used for; theres value in being more explicit.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJV1vDG
> AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MIAIMtLLA4q7KJiwrYrpjFWme1ys9iyPZiADJGQWG3qKlH
> Q4pEcwWt69jfTUCjLYfegsDW4eEMarejs568iSF70hvGB4OPWrYK3YiM1cWlWtDD
> seN3G/4dJjehL7h1Nz+/OTjTlePkguHctRlJTavel8sI7fg356iMJc1Ggm5Q1ZFl
> CLrivr/CEO7Qk9Uo5ewhnwConKjLygSyv67SSaMJW7pZB06uTX6M3lk11c/RB/C6
> JKPqxkvOmNIX9U8S/G3Y2pYf3/up72IhP0Ugp31iOsz629B2WvEsDYu/0SP61+oZ
> za9HrP2g8OsxVq6SUD3MukmbRVKklvcnro4vk5sOlYI=
> =Jfl+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150822/e8603b17/attachment.html>;
Nicolas Dorier [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hu…9q4u3
2023-06-07 15:48:26
in reply to nevent1q…j52y
Author Public Key
npub1huz53hq26gu7nc0qhw3uj6tr9hk5q2ngpywduxep5zy4ay9unftsm9q4u3Published at
2023-06-07 15:48:26Event JSON
{
"id": "241a2bf4a919b315ad52e98a79c9c2e5a212617db58314d038fd85bd4061b81f",
"pubkey": "bf0548dc0ad239e9e1e0bba3c969632ded402a68091cde1b21a0895e90bc9a57",
"created_at": 1686152906,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"81612a52e56fa005f6bed2cd04b516c7f082f0037e6ded416072f80ed9714e09",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"9d644cdb8293f6f8e573aa4059966ca8e32c9ca44b7eccc10a2f59f8a6cc2fb4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"33228a8ed797b24e872fc0257c1515fc9bca74c0b230dcbb7d3d2bd38fd97ed7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21\n📝 Original message:My UX skills are lacking a bit. You can edit all your thoughts about each\nBIP, HTML is accepted, so you can link to other posts you made somewhere\nelse.\nWhen you click on a cell in the grid, it forward you to the page that the\ndev edited for this BIP.\n\nThis website is not only to say \"approve\", \"disapprove\", nor is it about a\nformal process for reaching agreement.\nThis is a tool, a portal, which educates people, and permit you to link all\nof your thoughts about the various BIP and show it to others.\n\nWith the opinions browse able from the same website, you will notice in a\ngleam as soon as one of those proposal reach consensus. (I think SIPA's BIP\nhas a chance to do so, but nobody knows it yet)\nSadly, the most controversial is a BIP, the noisier it is, at the expense\nof those which are not. (like sipa's one).\n\nIt irritates me a lot that the debate in public mind is \"XT or not\" /\n\"Bigger blocks or not\", when in reality there is lots of different\nproposals that might also reach consensus but are lost in the noise.\nI will add any BIP that at least one voter approve and want to push forward.\nI plan to add merchants/wallet providers/mining pools later.\n\n\nOn Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\n\u003e Hash: SHA512\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On 21 August 2015 02:31:51 GMT-07:00, Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003eOn Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003e\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\u003e What might be valuable is to ask devs to explain what their threat\n\u003e \u003emodels are, what should be at the root of their thinking about the\n\u003e \u003eblocksize.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003eThat's exactly what the \"Technical Opinion\" column is for.\n\u003e\n\u003e What if could be used for; theres value in being more explicit.\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e\n\u003e iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJV1vDG\n\u003e AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MIAIMtLLA4q7KJiwrYrpjFWme1ys9iyPZiADJGQWG3qKlH\n\u003e Q4pEcwWt69jfTUCjLYfegsDW4eEMarejs568iSF70hvGB4OPWrYK3YiM1cWlWtDD\n\u003e seN3G/4dJjehL7h1Nz+/OTjTlePkguHctRlJTavel8sI7fg356iMJc1Ggm5Q1ZFl\n\u003e CLrivr/CEO7Qk9Uo5ewhnwConKjLygSyv67SSaMJW7pZB06uTX6M3lk11c/RB/C6\n\u003e JKPqxkvOmNIX9U8S/G3Y2pYf3/up72IhP0Ugp31iOsz629B2WvEsDYu/0SP61+oZ\n\u003e za9HrP2g8OsxVq6SUD3MukmbRVKklvcnro4vk5sOlYI=\n\u003e =Jfl+\n\u003e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150822/e8603b17/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "3f56bce0770e4820bc89ea5127b7fe6eb9877fcf6ddecf2caa70a03cea0d25c453eb31311d316e5fcea949a418c548387f9bf1868fe6f1fc8bf3de588269d859"
}