rich1.0npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwethttps://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18 📝 Original message:On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote: >> And allegations that the project is "run like wikipedia" or "an edit war" >> are verifyably untrue. >> Check the commit history. > > This was a reference to a post by Gregory on Reddit where he said if Gavin > were to do a pull request for the block size change and then merge it, he > would revert it. And I fully believe he would do so! http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37pv74/gavin_andresen_moves_ahead_with_push_for_bigger/croxw9o?context=1 This is the only reddit comment I've made using the word revert in recent memory, so I know you couldn't be referring to another. >> I was recently in a situation similar to what Gavin is in insofar as a design dispute that could improperly solved by a git push. I'm pretty impressed he hasn't given in and done a midnight push. It's cool to see him back channeling support. > Such a change would be immediately reverted. And, I probably should have continued "and resulted with an immediate revocation of commit rights on the assumption that his account had been compromised." There is nothing controversial about that.