From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YqRF0-0001vT-Mm for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.214.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.171; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-ob0-f171.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com ([209.85.214.171]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YqREz-0004pT-Pe for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 +0000 Received: by obblk2 with SMTP id lk2so39253348obb.0 for ; Thu, 07 May 2015 12:13:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=HHuVFNk/PgwJySVbLEGcWd1/+H4vDpzFwUZolu0vfH4=; b=RqmGWNQ6l9MSKLWGp705r5QfZgpnQdOqgUZOFeBxPFMbsKGGiSozKRxj1sACTqx0m7 Dk15x29NaDbJtSWpJ00s+fkn43dYpG94wN9h5iWuyyqll1ZMx1XU40zVIPK7BDz9wzDH zlBUL1+4NERaO8kBcTKqhE7SycCPtXIquO3UgDtNiYOR/6Cb4fCVXeRc1UVF0gNCDDW/ ev5ALyZA07DRBEjSdWZni2gHUE2NcBDItGnchN0sYfdHv+emL6oxXNgSkqjqrytd02Oa jL0yuW+1kT0evpvdW4kxopPA0SBhvAYWbyVpuErr4CdI0Rd19nQjv1cGvbFL/oKD25Dc 6Tyg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmn46pIp0Qil3kF9CQxpPfsjGurOl5TFraTW2q+xeHfpXUkBEytZCBOXqmya+nfNJ/AJfhq X-Received: by 10.202.224.11 with SMTP id x11mr85595oig.33.1431026024194; Thu, 07 May 2015 12:13:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 12:13:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <554BB718.6070104@bluematt.me> References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me> <554BA032.4040405@bluematt.me> <554BB718.6070104@bluematt.me> From: Jeff Garzik Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:13:23 -0400 Message-ID: To: Matt Corallo Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -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 -0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1YqREz-0004pT-Pe Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase 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, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 -0000 --001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Matt Corallo wrote: > More generally, consider the situation we're in now. Gavin is going off > pitching this idea to the general public (which, I agree, is an > important step in pulling off a hardfork) while people who actually > study the issues are left wondering why they're being ignored (ie why is > there no consensus-building happening on this list?). This sub-thread threatens to veer off into he-said-she-said. > If, instead, there had been an intro on the list as "I think we should > do the blocksize increase soon, what do people think?", the response > could likely have focused much more around creating a specific list of > things we should do before we (the technical community) think we are > prepared for a blocksize increase. Agreed, but that is water under the bridge at this point. You - rightly - opened the topic here and now we're discussing it. Mike and Gavin are due the benefit of doubt because making a change to a leaderless automaton powered by leaderless open source software is breaking new ground. I don't focus so much on how we got to this point, but rather, where we go from here. -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ --001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me> wr= ote:
> More generally, consider the situation we're in now. Gavin= is going off
> pitching this idea to the general public (which, I ag= ree, is an
> important step in pulling off a hardfork) while people w= ho actually
> study the issues are left wondering why they're bei= ng ignored (ie why is
> there no consensus-building happening on this= list?).

This sub-thread threatens to veer off into he-said-sh= e-said.

> If, instead, there had been an intro on the list a= s "I think we should
> do the blocksize increase soon, what do p= eople think?", the response
> could likely have focused much mor= e around creating a specific list of
> things we should do before we = (the technical community) think we are
> prepared for a blocksize inc= rease.

Agreed, but that is water under the bridge at this= point.=C2=A0 You - rightly - opened the topic here and now we're discu= ssing it.

Mike and Gavin are due the benefit of doubt bec= ause making a change to a leaderless automaton powered by leaderless open s= ource software is breaking new ground.=C2=A0 I don't focus so much on h= ow we got to this point, but rather, where we go from here.
<= br>--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist<= br>BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https:/= /bitpay.com/

--001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561--