{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1mju50kqcm07heu967fkq6h4kq666xgekc4yrldf7q52xx9vr8jnsrdxnq7","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1mju50kqcm07heu967fkq6h4kq666xgekc4yrldf7q52xx9vr8jnsrdxnq7","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-10-05\n📝 Original message:On Monday 5. October 2015 18.04.48 Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Unsuccessfully.\n\u003e \n\u003e I think rather successfully.\n\nArguing that BIP66 rollout was a full success is in the same park of \n\"successful\" ?\nWhere for weeks people were told not to trust the longest chain until it was \n30 blocks.\nLets put that in perspective. The main functionality of Bitcoin  \nFrankly, if that fiasco happened in a company, people would get fired for \ngross misconduct.\n\nBottom line is that there is a horrible track record of doing soft forks in \nthe past, there are some really good technical reasons why this should not \nhappen again. \n\nAnd the defence against this argument is to do character assassination because \nyou think he has ulterior motives?  Like you say in this part;\n\n\u003e That Mike himself continues to misexplain\n\u003e things is not surprising since he has all but outright said that his\n\u003e motivation here is to disrupt Bitcoin in order to try to force his\n\u003e blocksize hardfork on people. \n\n\"all but outright said\" is still not said. Is still just a suspicion you have. \nAnd you are accusing a man of something he didn't do.\nThat’s just not right.\n\n\u003e \u003e The point is that Bitcoin Core claims to have a consensus mechanism and\n\u003e \u003e sticks to \"no change\" on not reaching a consensus. And that rule is the\n\u003e \u003e reason why bigger blocks were blocked for years.\n\u003e \n\u003e You're repeating Mike's claims there-- not anyone elses. Take your\n\u003e complaint up with him-- not the list.\n\nThere is no complaint. Why do you think there is?\nAre you claiming that not reaching consensus is NOT the reason that bigger \nblocks are not in Bitcoin Core?\n\n\nReaching consensus is an admirable goal. But its exactly that, a goal.\nAnd anyone that is a perfectionist will know that in the real world goals are \noften not reached. That doesn't make them less useful. That makes them goals.\nThis specific goal is in conflict of building a good product and a well \nfunctioning community.\n\nA good product and a well functioning community needs rules and needs timely \ndecisions and conflict resolution.\nIt does not need muting of valuable voices, it does not need character \nassassinations and it really doesn't need egos.\n\nI suggest reading this book;\nhttp://www.artofcommunityonline.org/"}