{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1rv5ajnhgrc0wq3ulrk6tcjkgsaq8h4rs5rtsvrnklz4j0lw40egqphc5wt","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1rv5ajnhgrc0wq3ulrk6tcjkgsaq8h4rs5rtsvrnklz4j0lw40egqphc5wt","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-15\n📝 Original message:\u003e So if you want a user vote, that's an issue that'd have to be tackled:\n\u003e the people who admin the main communication channels Bitcoin users have\n\u003e vowed to censor any program that doesn't slavishly follow 51%+ hash\n\u003e power. That attempt to control the conversation is certainly not\n\u003e libertarian or democratic in nature, but there you go.\n\nThese types of actions are immediately apparent to anyone who looks at \nthe Bitcoin ecosystem (Bitcoin.org, Githib, Wiki, bitcointalk, etc.) and \nwere readily apparent long before any block size debate.  It is almost a \ntaboo subject and anyone who raises these types of issues is immediately \nlabeled as a \"troll.\"  These are the people who used to run around \nsaying that Bitcoin development is \"decentralized\" because anyone can \nfork the code and now many of the same people claim a fork will destroy \neverything.\n\nThe problem is that a small group of highly irrational and inexperienced \npeople (outside of the small and unusual Bitcoin ecosystem) have control \nover the majority of the resources.  I think over time the problem will \neven itself out but currently it is an obstacle in moving Bitcoin forward.\n\nRuss"}