| Thanks for answering Greg. This isn't a throw-away account. I've lurked for years without needing to become involved. The larger public needs to know that: > We founded the company. Obviously you're the CTO but not all of the other 'employees' paid by your company founded it with you. > You know that Bitcoin is a decentralized system that no one controls; right? Actually you've locked down the codebase. Any one developer can make a common sense change contentious and prevent it from being merged. That's kinda centralized don't you think? Getting a few people to disagree is a pretty low barrier if a government was bent on destroying Bitcoin. We need decentralized development to match Bitcoin's decentralized nature. > Bitcoin, and it's working pretty darn well at the moment. Does that include transactions that don't go through even with correct fees? What do you say to the new user that did nothing wrong and has to wait 3 days for his coins to reappear in his wallet because he tried to send a transaction during a high-volume time? Does that also include overly expensive fees approaching 50cents and could reach several dollars within the year? Limiting transaction velocity and making transactions artificially expensive is a bad idea at this point in Bitcoin's existence. You need to stop ignoring that network operations are failing. > Via our magical mind control rays, I suppose.. No, by calling alternate code bases altcoins - even though they operate on the same blockchain - you have setup an environment where they are not allowed to be honestly discussed at length on /r/bitcoin. Further, even though positive posts are banned, negative posts about other Bitcoin wallet/mining software are allowed. Any outside person can clearly see that is censorship. Moderators point to CoreDevelopers as the reason for that censorship. I also know you know Theymos so you can't say you're not buddies with him. I'm sure if you wanted you could ask for it and have posts removed/deleted. |
The "top developers of Bitcoin" you were referring to did.
> Actually you've locked down the codebase.
So, there is a concrete claim of an action. But you're not specific. Locked down how? What are you referring to? Please provide hyperlinks for clarity.
> We need decentralized development
Every developer has their own codebase, the community tends to cooperate because its efficient and makes sense. But participating at all requires making your own fork, and anyone can at any time promote their fork for public use. Some have, but the ones created to rewrite Bitcoin's rules with a hardfork so far have not been supported by engineers and languish largely stillborn.
> Does that include transactions that don't go through even with correct fees?
I'm not aware of any issues like that, can you point me to a trouble ticket?
> Limiting transaction velocity
How have we done that? The design of Bitcoin and physical reality create limits and select trade-offs.
> No, by calling alternate code bases altcoins
We have?
> even though they operate on the same blockchain
The people who are calling things like the deceptively named Bitcoin "classic" altcoins do so specifically because when they activate they will not operate on the same blockchain.
> you have setup an environment where they are not allowed to be honestly discussed at length on /r/bitcoin. [...] I'm sure if you wanted you could ask for it
I, nor anyone at my company, have any control over /r/bitcoin's policies, and-- in fact-- I argued vigorously against them (before I saw what the unmoderated feed looked like-- a non-stop stream of brand new sockpuppet accounts promoting rule rewrites, often with dishonest claims, outnumbering all other posts 20:1)...
> I also know you know Theymos
What does that mean? I've had a few conversations with him, yes-- and in the ones where I tried to convince him to not use a fairly restrictive moderation policy in /r/bitcoin I failed.