pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby OP 16h \ parent \ on: DISCUSS: "If you ever made a sat from spam, you are a bad actor" bitcoin
^ You like this statement.
^ You don't like this statement?
When you say "but some people want to mass propagate the idea of having no filters at all" you are telling those people to use filters.
Explain how it is not contradictory to believe your filter policies are only decided by you but also that you don't like the filter policies someone else is running and should tell them to run filters.
Nobody can tell me to use filters
I don't like this statement. Bitcoin core has always used an OP_RETURN limit, and they are shit talking and disparaging alternative implementations, shredding their own reputations and that of the core bitcoin node implementation by engaging in personal attacks and combative behaviour.
Knots proponents are not engaging in a sneak attack by trying to shut down the debate, we're just making our arguments in good faith.
And the result is a minority of nodes upgrading on Core or actively migrating to knots. We don't need more knots users if core users just don't upgrade.
Objectively we're winning the debate. We won't go away. And filters and OP_RETURN limits work, the policy layer is real and legitimate, otherwise core wouldn't want to get rid of them and create a toxic environment to scare people away from the discussion.
Bottom line: if you are a moral relativist and think spam is not real, that consensus valid is the only thing that matters, then you are a shitcoiner infection and you will be filtered out, eventually.
reply
I'm surprised that you call the hard, objective line of consensus rules as "moral relativism." There is nothing relative about it. Consensus rules are clear, objective defined rules -- that's how the whole world comes to agree on a new block every 10 minutes.
Consensus is the only thing you can actually enforce (by refusing coins that don't adhere to the consensus rules you like).
Policy, on the the other hand, cannot be forced on any node except your own.
I'm happy for you to run any policy you like, just as I'm happy for someone to run a libre relay client with a very permissive relay policy.
Policy cannot be enforced and you have no control over what policy anyone else chooses to run -- just as you have no control over policies any developer decides to release code for.
you are a shitcoiner infection and you will be filtered out, eventually.
I think this demonstrates my point: if following consensus rules makes me a "shitcoiner infection," you may want to reconsider what coin you are using. It sounds like you don't like the consensus rules.
engaging in personal attacks and combative behaviour.
I will note that in this conversation, you have been more willing to engage in such behavior than I.
reply
I'm done with this conversation, you're twisting my words and either stupid or intentionally misstating my position.
Everyone knows that CSAM is immoral and decent people shouldn't relay those transactions.
reply