public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Toby Padilla <tobypadilla@gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Draft] Allow zero value OP_RETURN in Payment Protocol
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:10 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGcHOzwmon8ozxJEA566Z+uZkrpabouaT9v2H_PoQrjc=LquLw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160202191209.GA6880@muck>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2103 bytes --]

I think it would be helpful to clarify this in the list documentation.
Right now there's a bunch of conflicting information.

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev states:

"*Greylisting Notice*
Your first post to this list may be delayed by 5+ minutes due to Greylisting
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greylisting>. Subsequent posts should go
through without delay."

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-October/011591.html
states:

"Everyone starts moderated, and the mod bit gets cleared as they post. It
gets set again if someone notices or reports a violation."

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 09:41:35AM -0800, Toby Padilla wrote:
> > Then the moderation is being unevenly applied. Luke commented against my
> > BIP multiple times right after it was published but it took hours for my
> > responses to go through and I had to track people down on IRC to ask
> about
> > it:
> >
> >
> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-January/thread.html
>
> Keep in mind that actual human beings need to hit the approve button on
> your posts; quite likely Luke happened to respond when those humans were
> available, and you didn't. I personally had to do the exact same thing
> the other day with one of my posts.
>
> Moderation is an unfortunate thing to need, but this list is read by
> literally hundreds of busy people, many of whome have had to unsubscribe
> at various points in the past due to a lack of moderation. I wish we had
> a better solution, but that's what we have. We're also not along in
> using fairly agressive moderation, for example the
> cryptography@metzdowd.com mailing list where Bitcoin was originally
> announced uses manual approval moderation on all messages as well;
> there's also an unmoderated offshoot of it, cryptography@randombit.net
>
> (and feel free to start an unmoderated version of bitcoin-dev!)
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 000000000000000008320874843f282f554aa2436290642fcfa81e5a01d78698
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3828 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-02 19:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-26  1:02 [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Draft] Allow zero value OP_RETURN in Payment Protocol Toby Padilla
2016-01-26  2:24 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26  2:54   ` Toby Padilla
2016-01-26  2:56     ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26  3:01       ` Toby Padilla
2016-01-26  3:04         ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26  3:07           ` Toby Padilla
2016-01-26  3:12             ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26  3:17               ` Toby Padilla
2016-01-26  3:23                 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26  3:30                   ` Toby Padilla
2016-01-26 16:19                     ` Thomas Kerin
2016-01-26 17:44                       ` Toby Padilla
2016-02-02 17:03                         ` Peter Todd
2016-02-02 17:16                           ` Pieter Wuille
2016-02-02 17:27                             ` Toby Padilla
2016-02-02 17:38                               ` Peter Todd
2016-02-02 17:41                                 ` Toby Padilla
2016-02-02 19:12                                   ` Peter Todd
2016-02-02 19:22                                     ` Toby Padilla [this message]
2016-02-02 19:14                             ` Luke Dashjr
2016-01-26 14:37     ` Andreas Schildbach
2016-01-26 17:41       ` Toby Padilla
2016-02-02 17:07         ` Peter Todd

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAGcHOzwmon8ozxJEA566Z+uZkrpabouaT9v2H_PoQrjc=LquLw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=tobypadilla@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=pete@petertodd.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox