Advertisement
Guest User

Untitled

a guest
Mar 9th, 2016
1,059
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 7.87 KB | None | 0 0
  1. Tasoshi> hi, is the bitcoin-dev mailing list meant to be cross-implementation?
  2. * Beef has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  3. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: yes
  4. <Tasoshi> would it then be appropriate to have on the moderating list contributors from other implementations?
  5. <Tasoshi> or clients
  6. * ghtdak has quit (Quit: WeeChat 1.4-dev)
  7. <Lauda> Anyone up for a question in regards to libsecp256k1 and the problem of validation time (at 2 MB block size limit)? I just can't remember the answer.
  8. <Lauda> Not sure whether this channel is the right one.
  9. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: probably. most of the moderators aren't Core devs FWIW
  10. <Luke-Jr> (in fact, I'm not sure if any are..)
  11. <Tasoshi> to avoid any potential bias in moderation however, would it not be more appropriate to have prominent contributors to other implementations on the mailing list, such as andrew stone for example or jonathan toomim if of course they up for it
  12. <Tasoshi> btw I am misusing implementation - I mean client or and implementation
  13. * Dizzle (~Dizzle@104-6-36-162.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net) has joined
  14. * RoboTeddy (~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined
  15. <Tasoshi> otherwise the bitcoin-dev mailing list may seem somewhat biased and a "bitcoin-core" list which may make cross-cooperation difficult
  16. * RoboTeddy has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
  17. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: Toomim certainly seems like not appropriate for being a moderator, but maybe Stone (I don't know him well)
  18. * Dizzle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  19. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: the head mod is Jeff Garzik, who works on Classic
  20. * Dizzle (~Dizzle@104-6-36-162.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net) has joined
  21. <Tasoshi> he is extremely busy however. Andrew Stone is the lead dev of bitcoin unlimited
  22. <Tasoshi> why is Jonathan toomim not appropriate?
  23. * OneFixt has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  24. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: he basically thinks he is superior to everyone else and that everyone must obey him, and he isn't even competent. major ego problems.
  25. <Tasoshi> that sounds highly opinionated
  26. <Tasoshi> and of course not your opinion or say
  27. <Tasoshi> the point is whether bitcoin-dev mailing list is cross-client and if so then the moderators should be from many clients
  28. * ongolaBoy has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
  29. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: or rather, what clients they contribute to is not a basis for discrimination
  30. <Tasoshi> it is, if one looks at if from a discrimination perspective
  31. <Luke-Jr> considering the lead mod is a Classic dev, and none of the mods are Core devs, despite Core being the only really significant implementation, I think there's a clear lack of bias in favour of Core
  32. <Tasoshi> if there is to be no bias, then contributors to other clients should have a moderating say
  33. * Beef (~beef@unaffiliated/beef) has joined
  34. <Tasoshi> I disagree, the mailing list, if not in actuality, is perceived to be highly biased
  35. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: such perception has no basis in reality
  36. <Luke-Jr> no basis at all
  37. <Tasoshi> plus, no one precludes a core dev being included in the moderation pannel
  38. <Tasoshi> that's your opinion :)
  39. <Luke-Jr> just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean they become opinions.
  40. <Tasoshi> what I am trying to establish is a working relationship based on perceived fairness if bitcoin-dev mailing list is to be truly cross client
  41. <Tasoshi> in any reasonable view, for the mailing list to be truly cross client, it needs to have on the moderating panel contributors to different clients, that means core, classic, unlimited and xt
  42. <Tasoshi> if not jonathan from classic, then tom hardin I think his name is, "tomz"
  43. * priidu has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
  44. <btcdrak> The bitcoin-dev mailing list is for Bitcoin protocol discussion.
  45. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: moderation isn't a competition
  46. <Tasoshi> doesn't really matter, as long as they're not extremely busy and practically unable to moderate
  47. <Tasoshi> I agree
  48. <Tasoshi> but moderation can be very biased
  49. <Luke-Jr> generally not
  50. <Tasoshi> that's your opinion
  51. <dgenr8> tomz is tom zander
  52. <Luke-Jr> frankly, if we ever got to the point where bias mattered, the moderators are going too far
  53. <Tasoshi> thank you
  54. <Tasoshi> some say they are Luke-jr
  55. <Tasoshi> now maybe they wrong, it doesn't really matter
  56. <Luke-Jr> it does matter
  57. <Tasoshi> as I said I am trying to establish a working relationship
  58. <Luke-Jr> people making up utter rubbish FUD should simply be ignored
  59. <Tasoshi> and by any reasonable analysis, if the mailing list is to be cross client, then it needs on the moderating list contributors from different clients
  60. <Luke-Jr> which it has
  61. <Tasoshi> it has no one from bitcoin unlimited
  62. <Tasoshi> or xt
  63. <Tasoshi> or btcd
  64. <Luke-Jr> so?
  65. <Luke-Jr> it has people from different clients
  66. <Tasoshi> Luke, I am not here to argue
  67. <Tasoshi> as I said, I am here to propose a working relationship
  68. <Tasoshi> if you do not with to be co-operative that is fine
  69. <Luke-Jr> …
  70. <Luke-Jr> the only ones not being co-operative, are the ones spreading FUD and/or not participating
  71. <Tasoshi> but, if the mailing list is to be cross client in any reasonable analysis it needs to have on the moderating list contributors to different clients so that the moderator's actions are not biased
  72. <Tasoshi> we need, in my view, to distill the political aspects from just code
  73. <Luke-Jr> Andrew Stone recently began to reach out, and I encouraged more cooperation.
  74. <Tasoshi> sure, on political aspects there is disagreement, but on many aspects we need to co-operate
  75. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: we already have that
  76. <Tasoshi> and we need to establish a basis on how that co-operation is to be carried out
  77. <Tasoshi> for any such co-operation there must be not only bias, but not even the possibility of bias, there must be checks and balances
  78. <Tasoshi> which is set by contributors to different clients being on the moderating pannel
  79. <Chris_Stewart_5> when verifying sigs for a p2sh/multisig input sigs are always assumed to be in order right?
  80. <Tasoshi> Luke-Jr, developers from other clients can not co-operate on a mailing list that may act as a podium
  81. <Tasoshi> if you wish to co-operate you have to set up checks and balances
  82. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: take your politics somewhere else. the ML is not where they belong.
  83. <Tasoshi> the ball is on you really
  84. <Tasoshi> but it is
  85. * Xanather has quit (Quit: Leaving)
  86. <Tasoshi> the moderators of the mailing list can be highly biased towards a client
  87. <Tasoshi> that is why you need moderators who are not super busy from different clients to balance any potential bias
  88. <Luke-Jr> everyone *is* super busy, which is why the majority of the moderators don't work on *any* client
  89. <Tasoshi> are you rejecting my proposal?
  90. <Tasoshi> not that you have any say of course, being just one guy
  91. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: I am rejecting your continued wasting of my time here. goodbye.
  92. <Tasoshi> then don't claim the mailing list is cross client
  93. <Luke-Jr> it is, so I will continue to claim so
  94. <Tasoshi> or that the bip process is cross client
  95. <moli> Tasoshi: go away
  96. <Luke-Jr> it also is
  97. <Tasoshi> that's your opinion
  98. <Luke-Jr> no, it is the fact
  99. <moli> Tasoshi: you've been wasting core devs' time too much, go away
  100. <Tasoshi> you have no monopoly on facts
  101. * jaclupi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  102. <Luke-Jr> I don't. You could have facts too if you didn't so vehemently reject them.
  103. <Tasoshi> unless you can give me some certain mathematical equation to prove it then it is simply your opinion
  104. <moli> as if you can understand maths?
  105. <Tasoshi> good to know bitcoin core devs have no desire whatever to co-operate however
  106. <Tasoshi> that was necessary information
  107. <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: you reveal your utter dishonesty when you go forward spreading such absolute lies like that
  108. <jonasschnelli> guys,.. this type of conversation does not belong here. Its a tech/dev channel.
  109. <Tasoshi> so is the mailing list
  110. <Tasoshi> how cross clients co-operate is pretty tech
  111. <Tasoshi> but I'd be interested to hear other opinions than Luke's
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement