rich1.0npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7edhttps://nostr.ae/npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7ednjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-10-05 📝 Original message:On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > History has shown that for many decision making processes this doesn't > work, > and this argument has been made to Core. > Until today this was essentially a rule that hurt the things that Mike was > really passionate about. > Today this hurts the things that some other devs are passionate about. > If you are referring to some of Mike's PRs that were either refused or reverted, it was because they where substantial technical objections to them. This isn't even in the same ballpark. Surely you see the absurdity of arguing against soft forks after we successfully used them already for BIP34 and BIP66? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151005/bc7c4a65/attachment.html>