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 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 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.
cmpctblock? Sounds like trolling.