rich1.0npub1fvuxqdqg7klqqgy3yy8gdxjv4phu92sll5y8zqm2qe5qdrhxymhqf3vq7fhttps://nostr.ae/npub1fvuxqdqg7klqqgy3yy8gdxjv4phu92sll5y8zqm2qe5qdrhxymhqf3vq7fnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-08-18 📝 Original message:Just to add some superfluous and unessential spice to this discussion, there were two Satoshi users originally registered in sourceforge, one registered very soon after the other. So I say Satoshi were at least two people, so it may be the case that one Satoshi re-appeared, but the other did not. Ore maybe one Satoshi is for Bitcoin XT, and the other Satoshi is against it. Satoshi wars! On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Anon Moto via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > And this is how the powers that be compromise bitcoin. They can't stop > TCP/IP, but they sure can take over the development team. It's a good thing > that no one from the CIA has had any conversations with anyone from the > bitcoin development team. Phew... > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Oliver Egginger via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Am 18.08.2015 um 11:15 schrieb Warren Togami Jr.: >> > I honestly don't understand your position, but I get the sense that you >> > are suggesting Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to return if he wanted to be >> > active in development again? >> >> Who am I? Personally I have zero objection if the creator steps in. I >> think he would be highly welcome by the most people. At first I had the >> impression that the email was a fake, but maybe I was wrong. At the >> moment I think: Maybe it's even the best if we do not know exactly >> whether it was Satoshi or not. >> >> Unanimity is mission critical for Bitcoin and must be an absolute >> priority. If not the vast majority is in favor for a fork, then the fork >> should be avoided until a consensus is found. Even if it takes until the >> cows come home. >> >> But it is very likely now that it will come to a fork. No matter which >> site will win, this will produce a lot of humiliated people at the end. >> That's not good and leads to bitterness on both sites. >> >> - oliver >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150818/8de0e558/attachment.html>