From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5haO-0000jO-Jp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:43:00 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from resqmta-po-02v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.161]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5haN-00035y-Hq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:43:00 +0000 Received: from resomta-po-18v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.242]) by resqmta-po-02v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id hxi31q0035E3ZMc01xitWF; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:42:53 +0000 Received: from crushinator.localnet ([IPv6:2601:186:c000:825e:e9f4:8901:87c7:24a0]) by resomta-po-18v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id hxir1q00L4eLRLv01xitAB; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:42:53 +0000 From: Matt Whitlock To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:42:51 -0400 Message-ID: <1867667.WXWC1C9quc@crushinator> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/3.18.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <55831CAB.2080303@jrn.me.uk> References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net> <55831CAB.2080303@jrn.me.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [96.114.154.161 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Z5haN-00035y-Hq Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:43:00 -0000 On Thursday, 18 June 2015, at 8:31 pm, Ross Nicoll wrote: > I may disagree with Mike & Gavin on timescale, but I do believe there's > a likelihood inaction will kill Bitcoin An honest question: who is proposing inaction? I haven't seen anyone in this whole, agonizing debate arguing that 1MB blocks are adequate. The debate has been about *how* to increase the block-size limit and whether to take action ASAP (at the risk of fracturing Bitcoin) or to delay action for further debate (at the risk of overloading Bitcoin). Even those who are arguing for further debate are not arguing for *inaction*.