{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18\n📝 Original message:On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e And allegations that the project is \"run like wikipedia\" or \"an edit war\"\n\u003e\u003e are verifyably untrue.\n\u003e\u003e Check the commit history.\n\u003e\n\u003e This was a reference to a post by Gregory on Reddit where he said if Gavin\n\u003e were to do a pull request for the block size change and then merge it, he\n\u003e would revert it. And I fully believe he would do so!\n\nhttp://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37pv74/gavin_andresen_moves_ahead_with_push_for_bigger/croxw9o?context=1\n\nThis is the only reddit comment I've made using the word revert in\nrecent memory, so I know you couldn't be referring to another.\n\n\u003e\u003e I was recently in a situation similar to what Gavin is in insofar as a design dispute that could improperly solved by a git push. I'm pretty impressed he hasn't given in and done a midnight push. It's cool to see him back channeling support.\n\u003e Such a change would be immediately reverted.\n\nAnd, I probably should have continued \"and resulted with an immediate\nrevocation of commit rights on the assumption that his account had\nbeen compromised.\"\n\nThere is nothing controversial about that."}