pull down to refresh

Should Bitcoin Core's Repo on Github be Moderated?
816 sats \ 10k boost \ 22 comments \ @unschooled 30 Apr bitcoin
No preface here.
Should discussions in pull requests, issues, etc, on the Bitcoin Core repository be moderated, whereby certain people have privilege to hide/block participants?
Simple "ye"s or "no" poll. Discuss in comments.
Yes46.8%
No53.2%
47 votes \ 6 days left
write
preview
related posts
0 replies \ @unschooled OP 11h
It was my hope that stackers would consider this question carefully vis-a-vis the phrasing:
whereby certain people have privilege to hide/block participants?
Relevant and timely discussion has been broached by Darosior in a Bitcoin Core Meta Issues thread.
reply
227 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 30 Apr
I'd say yes. Incessant and unproductive noise from certain people can sap other people's ability to focus on work. But that's probably because I've read about the preface you've omitted here. I know some of the context. And I'm thus probably biased in my answer. In an ideal world, I'd likely have said "no, one should not silence people on a project that has no central authority". Then again, Bitcoin core is just one implementation of the project (albeit the only one seriously being used), nothing keeps dissidents from starting their own implementation and try to get it adopted by the majority of people. One can moderate within a certain implementation, in theory, its effect does not reach outside of this specific implementation. Any company can refuse service to someone else, that does not infringe on someone's freedom of speech. But due to the very specific nature of Bitcoin core, it's hard to really decide on yes or no.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @unschooled OP 30 Apr
Ofc the context is certainly important here. I've chosen not to include it so that others can explain, as you have done. By now, I feel I've weighed in on SN about my pov, so I don't want to dilute the discussion any more with whatever my bias may be.1
I'd encourage everyone to seek out reliable information critically before making snap judgements. That being said, there probably is at least some value in knowing how outsiders do make snap judgements about this question (if it is done appropriately - hence the poll).
But due to the very specific nature of Bitcoin core, it's hard to really decide on yes or no.
Do you think maybe the solution is a pay 2 post model?

Footnotes

  1. #965828 ↩
reply
63 sats \ 0 replies \ @Artilektt 30 Apr
Pay 2 Post could be a good idea
reply
143 sats \ 1 reply \ @gbks 30 Apr
The answer is obviously yes to anyone who has managed a public project or community. A code repository is for code-related things and some very deep work happens there. The mailing list and other avenues exist for other types of conversation.
reply
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @SevenOfNine 30 Apr
100%. Though, good luck trying to express that nuance to individuals responding with "No".
reply
84 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 30 Apr
Yes. Because without at least a minimum amount of moderation... anyone could spam the discussion or add reasonably unhelpful comments that don't further a discussion based on merits.
reply
52 sats \ 0 replies \ @kristapsk 30 Apr
Yes, there are from time to time scam posts or some nonsense pull requests by people who don't know how to use GitHub properly.
reply
11 sats \ 2 replies \ @petertodd 30 Apr
Moderation is utterly unavoidable. If it genuinely was unmoderated assholes would just flood is with garbage.
The only real discussion is to what degree is it moderated.
Ironically, a semi-serious suggestion that someone made recently was to charge a fee per comment... 😂😂😂
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @unschooled OP 30 Apr
Thanks for joining in the discussion. I was hoping you might.
The only real discussion is to what degree is it moderated.
You're right. Relegating complex issues into a yes-no question doesn't seem up to snuff, does it? Good faith discussion of degrees in most things is vital and I think it goes without saying what the blowback looks like when we abandon that.
Ironically
Pay-to-post would seem consistent with the logic of allowing anyone of means the ability to pay to include non-transactional data in blocks. In truth, this doesn't really seem ironic in the way that I think you mean. Or have I misunderstood you?
The discussions playing out on SN are some of the more level-headed ones I've been able to parse regarding your recent pr. It may be a coincidence or my personal bias, but I can't help thinking that the pay to post model that's been implemented here has something to do with that.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 30 Apr
#967775
reply
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @_Bubble_2009 30 Apr
Let's say that the moderator could delete some spam, but there is a discourse of freedom of opinion. There are the maintainers who take care of closing the useless pulls. Here we have @Daniela who is maintainer of a GitHub that can tell how much time it spends closing useless Pull Requests.
(Daniela, I apologize if the term maintainer is incorrect)
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @itsrealfake 30 Apr
GITHUB IS NOT THE ANSWER.
WE SHOULD GET CORE INTO Nostr-based GIT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
reply
3 sats \ 5 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 22h
What would that even look like? Contrast with something like gitlab.
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @itsrealfake 21h
https://github.com/NostrGit/NostrGit
reply
3 sats \ 3 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 21h
wasting the resources of shared relays to store blobs? I don’t believe this will work. Nostr isn’t a general purpose blob storage system. GitHub gives you storage if you pay them or keep under their free tier usage. Git is already decentralized, you just have to store it yourself.
If you are using a private relay that stores the blobs, what does this offer over gitlab except a worse experience? You can run your own decentralized “GitHub like experience” on your own without need for nostr at all using Gitlab or other open source software.
A lot of these “on nostr” ideas don’t really make sense or are in any way scalable or economical. Maybe I am missing something?
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @itsrealfake 21h
Maybe I am missing something?
maybe.
people are already paying for relays... to store their general purpose blobs (images, notes, and other stuff) where other people can request them.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 21h
Are they? I’d be interested to know how many people pay for relays in 2025, especially that would allow large note sizes.
view all 1 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 22h
Yes, because GitHub is a centralized platform and must have moderation to prevent spam. There are plenty of ways out of band to protest a muting on GitHub, so there really isn’t a censorship argument. It’s operations on a high visibility public repo. GitHub doesn’t own Bitcoin. It’s just one window into its source code.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cappy_SC 23h
Hmm, if only there was a way to stop spam.....
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BITC0IN 30 Apr
Yes., But...
Feedback on that moderation is inevitable. It's somewhat important for Moderators to be open to that feedback, since some of it may be valid to consider.
reply