From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Vh7Q9-00053m-31 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:38:01 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.44; envelope-from=nanotube@gmail.com; helo=mail-qa0-f44.google.com; Received: from mail-qa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.216.44]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Vh7Q7-0006BL-4v for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:38:01 +0000 Received: by mail-qa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id f11so165670qae.17 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:37:53 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.224.80.4 with SMTP id r4mr6518108qak.69.1384475873693; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:37:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.100] (c-50-166-61-61.hsd1.nj.comcast.net. [50.166.61.61]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p17sm1129557qak.4.2013.11.14.16.37.52 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:37:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52856CC7.5050103@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 19:37:27 -0500 From: Daniel F User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Garzik , Bitcoin Dev References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (nanotube[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1Vh7Q7-0006BL-4v Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc 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: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:38:01 -0000 > This is a decentralized currency, and we should avoid centralizing > decisions. This is something that impacts the community at large, and > deserves input and discussion at every level. > > I would suggest posting on all possible forums "proposal: switch to > uBTC, labelled as ISO prefers (XBT?)" and see what sort of discussion > is generated. If the support is broad, it will be plain from the > responses if there is a consensus. Perhaps everyone will agree it is > the best course, and we can make an easy change. > > But we need less "core dev fiat" not more :) > this seems like such a paint-the-bikeshed problem that it's sure to generate vast volumes of discussion, waste a lot of people's time, and all for only a dubious (imo) gain. (case in point - here i am contributing to it :) ). i agree that we should avoid centralizing this. i'll go a step further and note that the client already has a dropdown allowing individuals to choose units. merchants are free to choose to price in different units. exchanges are free to denominate trade in different units. i suggest we just let the market do its thing and not get into trying to 'make a decision' of any sort.