Thread

Sorry, but this aligns for me: nostr:nevent1qqsdrf3efwuqgcz0aa0nc84ds60jgjrzqx4xuda7jv50ppfpwz6ep3gpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsgdp0taan9xwxadyc79nxl8svanu895yr8eyv0ytnss8p9tru047qrqsqqqqqp36t4dz I'm beginning to question the incentives for the head of sales for ocean.

"Network peer" and "software development peer" aren't the same "peer" though

Are you responding to my post? Because I don't think you've read it.

I am, and I did

I already addressed that point in the OP is why I ask.

I read what you wrote, and I read the GitHub link. My conclusion from these is that I'm glad people are upset and voicing their concerns, but I also don't think it belongs in a PR thread. I doubt Bitcoin Core is going to ignore node runners, as those are their customers and without them Core has no purpose. I'm not a Core dev, but if a hundred people showed up at my office I wouldn't let them in either. I would even push them out and lock my door. That's not the right way to affect change. The meta discussion *about* the discussion has actually been pretty effective at raising awareness, and is really the right way to affect change. My 2 sats

Moderation guidelines are not in the Bitcoin Core codebase itself. That would make no sense, since any fork could and should have its own policy. There's ongoing effort to move bitcoin/bitcoin to bitcoin-core/bitcoin to reduce that confusion. https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/blob/main/MODERATION-GUIDELINES.md

customers? are you retarded?

no you did not you are incapable of reading

That particular section was mostly written ten years ago, even before the Blocksize wars. Social media powered brigading wasn't much of a thing back then. It could make sense to update it and mention that each fork may or may not have a moderation policy.

Positively smooth brained. If you'd like to say anything of value let me know

You should not doubt. You should watch their actions and think. Also they say it in a plain text. Some of Bitcoin Core ignore node runners for sure. That is why we now run Bitcoin Knots and more of us should do it. nostr:nevent1qqs8sx0xuwv3euqw04w6ujan4v94ka8ey94zx4ufkqydappwzjjl6wcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0ddfyxe

"You should not doubt. You should watch their actions and think" I will always agree with that. My take is that Bitcoin Core is of course going to pay more attention to the people paying them, as is always the case. Assuming people will act in their own best interest is table stakes for life. I'm not concerned about it here because I don't think that Bitcoin Core is being lead around by corporate interests (yet). It seems that they're mostly being paid to "make Bitcoin better", and if they make decisions that needlessly disenfranchise node runners they will be failing to do that. Now I did say that "node runners" are their customers, and it's a common trope that if you aren't paying for something you aren't the customer, but if you're actually being paid to foster a healthy ecosystem, then to an extent those users are a direct proxy. And to that end, if node runners don't like something, they should say it. Or vote with their feet. Or, say it, *and* vote with their feet. But trekking mud through someone's office just to make a point isn't winning anything. In fact it's a pretty good demonstration that maybe not every customer is going to be a happy one... and that's okay too. The best way to persuade people is by making good arguments. It doesn't always work, but it's all we've got