rich1.0npub1xv3g4rkhj7eyape0cqjhc9g4ljdu5axqkgcdewma854a8r7e0mtsl5j2gahttps://nostr.ae/npub1xv3g4rkhj7eyape0cqjhc9g4ljdu5axqkgcdewma854a8r7e0mtsl5j2ganjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18 📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Recently I saw the following video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JmvkyQyD8w&t=47m58s Hadn't seen it until just today, although it was done on June 8, 2015. So this is a bit dated, but to me it was a bit of a stunner to see the extreme nature of (some) of the views presented in this video. Let me be blunt, I have serious concerns regarding threats issued by a developer in this video, and I think that it is entirely possible that those of you who are core developers have already seen this and have been discussing it. But I am interested in seeing this resolved here on this list openly and having it resolved. It's sad and unfortunate to me, but I feel that it's necessary to do this. Identify what's happening, address it squarely, have the person who is threatening others explain his/her behavior, deal with the problem and move on. This seems to be very important. Please tell me if I am wrong about this or totally flawed in my perspective here. Go right ahead. In this video, a particular developer makes the following statement, stating in part: "My preferred solution is that Gavin revokes commit access from everyone else in the project, and then... makes the change himself" Regardless of how you look at this, and even if we believe that Gavin will not respond to that developer's request for a so-called "solution," such a statement (by any developer) is indeed both a threat and an act of sabotage against the larger bitcoin community. We should certainly be thankful therefore, for the recent policy change at bitcoin.org which can be seen here: https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/61096/8173297/578483f8-1399-1 1e5-8f48-96f33d12b996.png I firmly believe that any developer who made a statement suggesting that commit access of others in the project be revoked so that they can proceed with their personal plan, needs to answer for having made such a suggestion with a formal apology to this list, followed by an explanation for why they themselves should not have their commit access removed. Overall, however, this sort of bombastic, nuclear suggestion makes me seriously concerned for the future of bitcoin (as well as any cryptocurrency which has repositories on Github). So, you know who you are: Apologize for your statement ("preferred solution") and explain to the community why you should still have commit access in light of the threat you have made to all the other developers (and indeed to all participants of the bitcoin community). These "nuclear options" are unacceptable to us all. Respectfully, - -O - -- http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVgoc3AAoJEGxwq/inSG8C6QYH/1Ag+4ESTSUPkP8PCTj1AJds J4MmBz4cX7IYsSttTAjyiwd6oTHCU+wAcXtgZYpzr8rWF62bG5/+kAFUfjKwNsGM WqcdNOR6h8fQulx8niuro8kZF/xOsG5eHtRK2FMCorxj0t6qn4pH5WAQL73J3hXQ xI831Nt/L7VTa0jlKbr2/VGlqh6CtGrZ9mXp6aV1MBNwHbFryNBJW9ubvUv/IRxZ GyJ+c3+Br2KKAQTMsyNn3VXMlXJL6kt0pwwk2od3j/+dKE4pAetHvZ5OgIO+qUWd 6R0/AaoW5jk343TaQ5BHaSpNW+OM9Yc1ycZyqE/YV8JwWeA6G/QdmRVYeoLMCZQ= =zJeO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----