From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D25889F for ; Mon, 9 May 2016 13:57:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx-out02.mykolab.com (mx01.mykolab.com [95.128.36.1]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED79419B for ; Mon, 9 May 2016 13:57:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com X-Spam-Score: -2.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx03.mykolab.com (mx03.mykolab.com [10.20.7.101]) by mx-out02.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68F6A601CD; Mon, 9 May 2016 15:57:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Tom To: Peter Todd Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 14:57:10 +0100 Message-ID: <10942480.58eYgA2pZj@garp> In-Reply-To: References: <5727D102.1020807@mattcorallo.com> <2273040.Bd6rtJjYLF@garp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 09 May 2016 14:00:24 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Development Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Compact Block Relay BIP X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 13:57:21 -0000 On Monday 09 May 2016 13:40:55 Peter Todd wrote: > >> [It's a little disconcerting that you appear to be maintaining a fork > >> and are unaware of this.] > > > >ehm... > > Can you please explain why you moved the above part of gmaxwell's reply to > here, A personal attack had no place in the technical discussion, I moved it out. Initially I asked him to please avoid personal attacks, but I thought better of it and edited my reply to just "ehm...". The moderators failed to catch his aggressive tone while moderating my post (see archives) for being too aggressive. I'm sure this message will also not be allowed through. I would not even blame the moderators since this, and Peters, messages were both off-topic. I thank you for todays talks, it makes me certain of the thing I said this weekend on Reddit that this list is not a suitable place for all the different stakeholders to talk on a level playing field. If any of you agree, please urge the approach that we replace the entire moderation team with a new one. This will be the least painful solution for everyone in the ecosystem. Thanks again.