I bet this drama would be much less heated, if we would try assigning statements to the people that said them, instead of larger groups of people that they are not even part of…
We could also try checking claims before amplifying them. Wouldn’t that be something?
I see references to Calle, though didn't say that, Wicked and Samson, on X. Not on the repo, on the maillist, or even delving. So it feels like "Protos Staff" is trying to escalate this a bit further. Pity.
So that likely was "trolling" / "attacking"... whatever we call it... I'd subjectively just label it bad taste. The original article makes it sound as if a maintainer personally was pushing this, but I didn't see that.
Too bad that we need code accountability. The whole cult of persona thing sucks, especially if it gets ascribed to people by some outlet without them actually doing anything.
I love Bitcoin culture and all it's weird, fun-ness, where instead of bureaucratic slop we get non-stop punning (among many other very fun mode of communication). Bitcoin has a mighty ability to not take ourselves too seriously: this is a very good thing. One great recent example is Greenpeace's "skullpture" which was supposed to be a series and savage critique of bitcoin, but which ended up being a pretty badass way advertise Bitcoin. Bitcoin thrives on name-calling and silliness of this sort.
It's sad to me that the author's of this article don't have a sense of humor.
I bet this drama would be much less heated, if we would try assigning statements to the people that said them, instead of larger groups of people that they are not even part of…
We could also try checking claims before amplifying them. Wouldn’t that be something?
Which dev?
deleted by author
I see references to Calle, though didn't say that, Wicked and Samson, on X. Not on the repo, on the maillist, or even delving. So it feels like "Protos Staff" is trying to escalate this a bit further. Pity.
PortlandHODL submitted the PR to Knots. Not sure he's a core dev though.
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/pull/167
I don't understand that PR at all. Why would you not include consensus-valid txns in
cmpctblock? Sounds like trolling.deleted by author
So that likely was "trolling" / "attacking"... whatever we call it... I'd subjectively just label it bad taste. The original article makes it sound as if a maintainer personally was pushing this, but I didn't see that.
Too bad that we need code accountability. The whole cult of persona thing sucks, especially if it gets ascribed to people by some outlet without them actually doing anything.
I love Bitcoin culture and all it's weird, fun-ness, where instead of bureaucratic slop we get non-stop punning (among many other very fun mode of communication). Bitcoin has a mighty ability to not take ourselves too seriously: this is a very good thing. One great recent example is Greenpeace's "skullpture" which was supposed to be a series and savage critique of bitcoin, but which ended up being a pretty badass way advertise Bitcoin. Bitcoin thrives on name-calling and silliness of this sort.
It's sad to me that the author's of this article don't have a sense of humor.
deleted by author
deleted by author
All this fighting and barbs are generally so silly. A technical issue turns into a joke and a fan fight.
The joke and the term are good; I've met some Knot users who are furious for no apparent reason.
deleted by author