{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub19a2m7qm80t7mzhgqfgunswhm5c3q4fkqt89057ugy7u8jdxncf2q06mwcl","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub19a2m7qm80t7mzhgqfgunswhm5c3q4fkqt89057ugy7u8jdxncf2q06mwcl","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2021-03-05\n📝 Original message:On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 9:39 AM Lonero Foundation via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e Hello, I want to start a new BIP proposal aiming to tackle some of\n\u003e the energy efficiency issues w/ Bitcoin mining. Excuse my ignorance\n\u003e given this is my first time making a BIP proposal, but is there a\n\u003e specific format I need to follow?\n\nHi Andrew,\n\nI would like to discourage you from writing a BIP on this topic, as\nany such proposal is guaranteed to be rejected based on prior\ndiscussions in the community.\n\nPlease update your priors with the following:\n\n  https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki\n    BIP: 2\n    Title: BIP process, revised\n\n  https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/\n    \"Nothing is Cheaper than Proof of Work\"\n    on | 04 Aug 2015\n\nYour topic brings up an interesting edge case, which is whether the\nBIP repository is an open forum for all possible arguments that are\ntechnically well constructed.  Obviously: no; but by what\nnon-arbitrary process do we decide?\n\nI propose that the BIP Editor's role should include preserving signal\nin the table of contents generated from our proposal repository, by\nunilaterally rejecting - without any fuhrer comment - technically well\nconstructed proposals which are guaranteed to be rejected based on\nprior discussions in the community, as spam.  I think this is already\nhow it works, but we haven't actually written down this part of the\nnorms.\n\nSince censorship is always a concern, it would be appropriate to\nmaintain a moderation log of spam BIPs, so that observers could judge\nwhether the BIP Editor is misusing the BIP assignment process to\ncensor proposals with some merit.  Since one of the requirements for\nsubmitting a BIP is to notify bitcoin-dev, the log is already\nmaintained.  Since bitcoin-dev is moderated, the moderators take on a\nlow level of responsibility for gauging spam proposals (and they are\npretty relaxed about it, since it is better to err on the side of\ninclusion for new developers, except for obvious patent bombing).\nSince the bitcoin-dev moderation log is public and anyone can\nsubscribe to it, protective transparency is again achieved.\n\n  https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev-moderation/"}