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 BCF4C9C for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 16:59:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com (mail-lb0-f169.google.com [209.85.217.169]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 085FB1AE for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 16:59:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbsx3 with SMTP id sx3so47420481lbb.0 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:59:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=9jGYkL8d7O6fqvRNTA1JzY/k+aRrJAI40aet6h1gWLg=; b=kNulnSaSF5UE2ImmAGb19st47bJWiEVl0BBQs37+rBo+GeVkLz0XeJ3ZW8a6SJ6uCv po9QnbXuOSpXghn8rXCa/M/H/Xtan7Knt9YKNtNa8bcqvZlBypmHAoPyxjA2ypix1jLd JSWvOlgF+1pzUpIpZdWPa+0Uc1JrgOMj2/i4nFZQVTnJupSm9kFnBRBSTOMbHoFg5ZBB u6XDbJciES2rxkWBPudPLfvRJdVUJYuArGJCmQwGjEqnCk8HSM4r0Jjq7JYRHk49xU/S BhQBl7mKakmg8uq/sDKRdAkshP9egda3zE39g4TcjMgKN21roTqQOQ8xODDc6ZORD7ep 8yZA== X-Received: by 10.152.42.170 with SMTP id p10mr8430616lal.39.1440176350297; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:59:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: slashene@gmail.com Received: by 10.25.142.15 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:58:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3B2A58B3-6AF6-4F1C-A6FA-7AEC97F48AD0@petertodd.org> References: <3B2A58B3-6AF6-4F1C-A6FA-7AEC97F48AD0@petertodd.org> From: Nicolas Dorier Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 01:58:50 +0900 X-Google-Sender-Auth: qdOTgvymQZNIzLPPptcv3Vhzcs4 Message-ID: To: Peter Todd Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c34c78c6059d051dd52f8a X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Core Devs : can you share your thoughts about all BIPs on this website ? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 16:59:14 -0000 --001a11c34c78c6059d051dd52f8a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 My UX skills are lacking a bit. You can edit all your thoughts about each BIP, HTML is accepted, so you can link to other posts you made somewhere else. When you click on a cell in the grid, it forward you to the page that the dev edited for this BIP. This website is not only to say "approve", "disapprove", nor is it about a formal process for reaching agreement. This is a tool, a portal, which educates people, and permit you to link all of your thoughts about the various BIP and show it to others. With the opinions browse able from the same website, you will notice in a gleam as soon as one of those proposal reach consensus. (I think SIPA's BIP has a chance to do so, but nobody knows it yet) Sadly, the most controversial is a BIP, the noisier it is, at the expense of those which are not. (like sipa's one). It irritates me a lot that the debate in public mind is "XT or not" / "Bigger blocks or not", when in reality there is lots of different proposals that might also reach consensus but are lost in the noise. I will add any BIP that at least one voter approve and want to push forward. I plan to add merchants/wallet providers/mining pools later. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > > > On 21 August 2015 02:31:51 GMT-07:00, Btc Drak wrote: > >On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev > > wrote: > >> What might be valuable is to ask devs to explain what their threat > >models are, what should be at the root of their thinking about the > >blocksize. > > > >That's exactly what the "Technical Opinion" column is for. > > What if could be used for; theres value in being more explicit. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJV1vDG > AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MIAIMtLLA4q7KJiwrYrpjFWme1ys9iyPZiADJGQWG3qKlH > Q4pEcwWt69jfTUCjLYfegsDW4eEMarejs568iSF70hvGB4OPWrYK3YiM1cWlWtDD > seN3G/4dJjehL7h1Nz+/OTjTlePkguHctRlJTavel8sI7fg356iMJc1Ggm5Q1ZFl > CLrivr/CEO7Qk9Uo5ewhnwConKjLygSyv67SSaMJW7pZB06uTX6M3lk11c/RB/C6 > JKPqxkvOmNIX9U8S/G3Y2pYf3/up72IhP0Ugp31iOsz629B2WvEsDYu/0SP61+oZ > za9HrP2g8OsxVq6SUD3MukmbRVKklvcnro4vk5sOlYI= > =Jfl+ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --001a11c34c78c6059d051dd52f8a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My UX skills are lacking a bit. You can edit all your thou= ghts about each BIP, HTML is accepted, so you can link to other posts you m= ade somewhere else.=C2=A0
When you click on a cell in the grid, it forw= ard you to the page that the dev edited for this BIP.

This website = is not only to say "approve", "disapprove", nor is it a= bout a formal process for reaching agreement.=C2=A0
This is a too= l, a portal, which educates people, and permit you to link all of your thou= ghts about the various BIP and show it to others.

With t= he opinions browse able from the same website, you will notice in a gleam a= s soon as one of those proposal reach consensus. (I think SIPA's BIP ha= s a chance to do so, but nobody knows it yet)
Sadly, the most= controversial is a BIP, the noisier it is, at the expense of those which a= re not. (like sipa's one).

It irritates me a l= ot that the debate in public mind is "XT or not" / "Bigger b= locks or not", when in reality there is lots of different proposals th= at might also reach consensus but are lost in the noise.
I will a= dd any BIP that at least one voter approve and want to push forward.
<= div>I plan to add merchants/wallet providers/mining pools later.=C2=A0


On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petert= odd.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512



On 21 August 2015 02:31:51 GMT-07:00, Btc Dra= k <btcdrak@gmail.com> wrote:=
>On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
><bitcoin-de= v@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> What might be valuable is to ask devs to explain what their threat=
>models are, what should be at the root of their thinking about the
>blocksize.
>
>That's exactly what the "Technical Opinion" column is for= .

What if could be used for; theres value in being more explicit.=
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJV1vDG
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MIAIMtLLA4q7KJiwrYrpjFWme1ys9iyPZiADJGQWG3qKlH
Q4pEcwWt69jfTUCjLYfegsDW4eEMarejs568iSF70hvGB4OPWrYK3YiM1cWlWtDD
seN3G/4dJjehL7h1Nz+/OTjTlePkguHctRlJTavel8sI7fg356iMJc1Ggm5Q1ZFl
CLrivr/CEO7Qk9Uo5ewhnwConKjLygSyv67SSaMJW7pZB06uTX6M3lk11c/RB/C6
JKPqxkvOmNIX9U8S/G3Y2pYf3/up72IhP0Ugp31iOsz629B2WvEsDYu/0SP61+oZ
za9HrP2g8OsxVq6SUD3MukmbRVKklvcnro4vk5sOlYI=3D
=3DJfl+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--001a11c34c78c6059d051dd52f8a--