Thread

Well, we can probably just, as they say, agree to disagree because I find the core developers turning themselves into some sort of priest class as disgusting as any of the stupid things that I've heard people on the other side of the argument, throwing out. Again, referring to users of the software as cattle or cultists is disgusting. And the people who run nodes and even the people who just use the software not only have a right to say what they think about the direction of the project, but a duty to. And I feel as strongly that name-calling and polarized shallow arguments from their side is just as bad. None of that helps. All it is is an easy way to virtue signal and plant your flag on the side that you want to be recognized as being a member of, in my opinion.

We aren’t smart enough to understand how wise it is to encourage shitcoins on Bitcoin Obviously

This is unacceptable to me. nostr:nevent1qqs8sx0xuwv3euqw04w6ujan4v94ka8ey94zx4ufkqydappwzjjl6wcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsgdp0taan9xwxadyc79nxl8svanu895yr8eyv0ytnss8p9tru047qrqsqqqqqpee9p5c

Narrative set by Mechanic and influencers jumped on the wagon. Hoped more people listened to bitcoin++ day 2 panels

But this PR was presented by core as “mostly unanimous”. How do you guys actually decide on this kind of issue? What’s the vote count for and against this PR? As an external I have no idea whatsoever. In the debate core/knots presented on bitcoin++ we trust that the 3 core people who spoke represent the majority of core devs thinking, isn’t this the case?