{"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:2015-10-05\n📝 Original message:On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e It is an eloquent change, but not really the topic we were discussing. It also\n\u003e makes you attack Mike (calling him out as having a strawman) without basis.\n\u003e For the second time in this thread.\n\u003e I would suggest arguing on the topic, not on the man.\n\nSuch a shame you appear to reserve that wisdom for those you disagree\nwith, biting your tongue when others emit all forms of ad hominem--\nsuch as suggesting we've spent less volunteer time on Bitcoin and thus\nour opinion has less merit (or that we haven't written certian kinds\nof software (even when, ironically, we have!), and thus our opinion\ndoesn't have merit, and so on). I think everyone would benefit from\nit, especially as that kind of correction is best received from\nsomeone who agrees with you.\n\nIn this case, I think, however your correction is also misplaced at\nleast on this message; though I would otherwise welcome it.  I'm not\ncomplaining about the man; but pointing out the behavior of stating an\nopinion no one as held as theirs and attacking it is not a productive\nway to hold a discussion. It's an argument or a behavior, not a\nperson, and beyond calling it bad I attempted to explaining (perhaps\npoorly) why its bad.\n\nWhat Sergio is saying is not the same; Mike argued some established\ncriteria existed where it didn't-- and I was pointing that out; and\ntalking about how the situation here is not very similar to the one\nthat Mike was trying to draw a parallel to. I enumerated a number of\nspecific reasons why this is the case. If the differences between\nSergio's comments and mine are still unclear after this clarification,\nI'd be glad to talk it through with you off-list-- in spite of your\n(welcome) compliments, communication is just fundamentally difficult,\nand no amount eloquence changes that. If there is continued\nmisunderstanding, I do not doubt its my fault; but it's probably not a\ngood use of hundreds/thousands of people's time for you to help me\ninteractively improve my explanation on list. :)"}