{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krq","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krq","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-15\n📝 Original message:\u003e On Jun 15, 2015, at 3:54 PM, odinn \u003codinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e I also disagree with the notion that everybody's just ok with what\n\u003e Mike and Gavin are doing.... specifically, this statement by Mike\n\u003e \n\u003e \u003e The consensus you seek does exist. All wallet developers (except\n\u003e \u003e Lawrence), all the major exchanges, all the major payment\n\u003e \u003e processors and many of the major mining pools want to see the limit\n\u003e \u003e lifted\n\n\nThis is certainly twisting words!\n\nWe all agree that the limit needs to eventually be lifted - but some of us certainly disagree with the means being used to do so by Mike and Gavin.\n\nMost news publications keep the discussion rather shallow and like to keep the controversy pretty black and white - some of us have far more nuanced views!\n\n- Eric Lombrozo\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/3aa4de8b/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 842 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/3aa4de8b/attachment.sig\u003e"}