{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17t0q8zqty0mzjuk6t6jul40zvszs0jwds0kkxy3d8x5xef60073sckadm9","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17t0q8zqty0mzjuk6t6jul40zvszs0jwds0kkxy3d8x5xef60073sckadm9","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-10-05\n📝 Original message:It's pretty clear Mike has turned into  concern troll and bully. He insults\npeople, mischaracterizes others, quibbles over words and definitions and\nhas stated numerous times in other forums he has no interest in building\nconsensus changes he doesn't agree with himself.\n\nHe's lost his integrity and trust and why the core developers waste their\ntime with his antics is beyond me, let Mike fork Bitcoin, develop XT, and\nignore his input on core unless some XT feature is deemed good enough to\nincorporate, that is how a thousand other open source projects deal with\ntrolls like Mike.\nOn Oct 5, 2015 3:41 PM, \"Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e It is an eloquent change, but not really the topic we were discussing.\n\u003e It also\n\u003e \u003e makes you attack Mike (calling him out as having a strawman) without\n\u003e basis.\n\u003e \u003e For the second time in this thread.\n\u003e \u003e I would suggest arguing on the topic, not on the man.\n\u003e\n\u003e Such a shame you appear to reserve that wisdom for those you disagree\n\u003e with, biting your tongue when others emit all forms of ad hominem--\n\u003e such as suggesting we've spent less volunteer time on Bitcoin and thus\n\u003e our opinion has less merit (or that we haven't written certian kinds\n\u003e of software (even when, ironically, we have!), and thus our opinion\n\u003e doesn't have merit, and so on). I think everyone would benefit from\n\u003e it, especially as that kind of correction is best received from\n\u003e someone who agrees with you.\n\u003e\n\u003e In this case, I think, however your correction is also misplaced at\n\u003e least on this message; though I would otherwise welcome it.  I'm not\n\u003e complaining about the man; but pointing out the behavior of stating an\n\u003e opinion no one as held as theirs and attacking it is not a productive\n\u003e way to hold a discussion. It's an argument or a behavior, not a\n\u003e person, and beyond calling it bad I attempted to explaining (perhaps\n\u003e poorly) why its bad.\n\u003e\n\u003e What Sergio is saying is not the same; Mike argued some established\n\u003e criteria existed where it didn't-- and I was pointing that out; and\n\u003e talking about how the situation here is not very similar to the one\n\u003e that Mike was trying to draw a parallel to. I enumerated a number of\n\u003e specific reasons why this is the case. If the differences between\n\u003e Sergio's comments and mine are still unclear after this clarification,\n\u003e I'd be glad to talk it through with you off-list-- in spite of your\n\u003e (welcome) compliments, communication is just fundamentally difficult,\n\u003e and no amount eloquence changes that. If there is continued\n\u003e misunderstanding, I do not doubt its my fault; but it's probably not a\n\u003e good use of hundreds/thousands of people's time for you to help me\n\u003e interactively improve my explanation on list. :)\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/20151005/bcabeadc/attachment.html\u003e"}