[Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Mats Henricson]

Hi!

My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
drives me nuts.

I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:

1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
   take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
   smarter people have said over and over before, you're
   wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.

2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
   just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.

Mats

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1033 bytes --]

Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
the page gets approval.
On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
> drives me nuts.
>
> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>
> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>
> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>
> Mats
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1526 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Ethan Heilman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1625 bytes --]

I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
> the page gets approval.
> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>> drives me nuts.
>>
>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>
>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>
>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>
>> Mats
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2641 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1855 bytes --]

I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
happily get a framework started.

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> wrote:

> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
>> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
>> the page gets approval.
>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>> drives me nuts.
>>>
>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>
>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>
>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>
>>> Mats
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3155 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Pindar Wong]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2647 bytes --]

Gabe,

Did you ever get an answer to this?

I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this and
will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.

I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
blocks... but hey that's just me.

p.




On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
> happily get a framework started.
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
>>> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
>>> the page gets approval.
>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>
>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>
>>>> Mats
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4490 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3172 bytes --]

Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.

I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gabe,
>
> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>
> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this and
> will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
> nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>
> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>
> p.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>> happily get a framework started.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
>>>> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
>>>> the page gets approval.
>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>
>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mats
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5188 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Pindar Wong]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3440 bytes --]

Thanks Gabe.

https://github.com/gappleto97/BlockSizeDebate

github's reachable via vpn.

p.


On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
> exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.
>
> I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
> this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
> some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
> On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Gabe,
>>
>> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>>
>> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this
>> and will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
>> nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>>
>> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
>> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>>
>> p.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>>> happily get a framework started.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
>>>>> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
>>>>> the page gets approval.
>>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mats
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5830 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3846 bytes --]

Please use the one it's originally forked from that Ethan made. I don't
want to be the one who sorts through what's valid and what isn't, as I
don't have as low-level an understanding as I'd like. I don't feel
qualified.
On Jun 6, 2015 2:34 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Gabe.
>
> https://github.com/gappleto97/BlockSizeDebate
>
> github's reachable via vpn.
>
> p.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
>> exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.
>>
>> I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
>> this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
>> some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
>> On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Gabe,
>>>
>>> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>>>
>>> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this
>>> and will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
>>> nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>>>
>>> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
>>> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>>>
>>> p.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>>>> happily get a framework started.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we could
>>>>>> condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to assist if
>>>>>> the page gets approval.
>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mats
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6386 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[Pindar Wong]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4131 bytes --]

OK... sorry for my confusion.

https://github.com/EthanHeilman/BlockSizeDebate

it is.

p.


On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:37 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please use the one it's originally forked from that Ethan made. I don't
> want to be the one who sorts through what's valid and what isn't, as I
> don't have as low-level an understanding as I'd like. I don't feel
> qualified.
> On Jun 6, 2015 2:34 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Gabe.
>>
>> https://github.com/gappleto97/BlockSizeDebate
>>
>> github's reachable via vpn.
>>
>> p.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
>>> exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.
>>>
>>> I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
>>> this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
>>> some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
>>> On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gabe,
>>>>
>>>> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>>>>
>>>> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this
>>>> and will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
>>>> nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>>>>
>>>> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
>>>> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>>>>
>>>> p.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>>>>> happily get a framework started.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>>>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>>>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we
>>>>>>> could condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to
>>>>>>> assist if the page gets approval.
>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mats
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7035 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4391 bytes --]

Nothing to apologize for. And yes, that's the correct one.
On Jun 6, 2015 2:39 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:

> OK... sorry for my confusion.
>
> https://github.com/EthanHeilman/BlockSizeDebate
>
> it is.
>
> p.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:37 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Please use the one it's originally forked from that Ethan made. I don't
>> want to be the one who sorts through what's valid and what isn't, as I
>> don't have as low-level an understanding as I'd like. I don't feel
>> qualified.
>> On Jun 6, 2015 2:34 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Gabe.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/gappleto97/BlockSizeDebate
>>>
>>> github's reachable via vpn.
>>>
>>> p.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
>>>> exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.
>>>>
>>>> I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
>>>> this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
>>>> some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
>>>> On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Gabe,
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on this
>>>>> and will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand the
>>>>> nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
>>>>> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>>>>>
>>>>> p.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>>>>>> happily get a framework started.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>>>>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>>>>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we
>>>>>>>> could condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to
>>>>>>>> assist if the page gets approval.
>>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mats
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7405 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Meta suggestions for this block size debate

[gabe appleton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4806 bytes --]

Just pushed the template for Arguments 3, 4, 6, and a full Argument 2.
Argument 5 should be pro, but is currently not defined. Argument 6 may be
merged with Argument 4 if you think that's necessary.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:41 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nothing to apologize for. And yes, that's the correct one.
> On Jun 6, 2015 2:39 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> OK... sorry for my confusion.
>>
>> https://github.com/EthanHeilman/BlockSizeDebate
>>
>> it is.
>>
>> p.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:37 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please use the one it's originally forked from that Ethan made. I don't
>>> want to be the one who sorts through what's valid and what isn't, as I
>>> don't have as low-level an understanding as I'd like. I don't feel
>>> qualified.
>>> On Jun 6, 2015 2:34 AM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Gabe.
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/gappleto97/BlockSizeDebate
>>>>
>>>> github's reachable via vpn.
>>>>
>>>> p.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. We made a git repo instead, so we don't have to bother with the
>>>>> exclusive-by-default wiki policies. It's linked in this email chain.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll be getting home tomorrow, so I should be able to start back up on
>>>>> this. A few days from now we should throw this on /r/Bitcoin so we can get
>>>>> some more public comment on it. They already gave me a few leads to chase.
>>>>> On Jun 5, 2015 11:34 PM, "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Gabe,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you ever get an answer to this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I"ll have some time tomorrow to be able to help with some work on
>>>>>> this and will need to do it myself anyways since I'm not sure I understand
>>>>>> the nuances, where bitcoin XT fits into the scheme of things (or not) etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would have thought that there would be a testnet4 by now using 8mb
>>>>>> blocks... but hey that's just me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> p.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, gabe appleton <gappleto97@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have permission to create a page. If someone else does, I'll
>>>>>>> happily get a framework started.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I second this, I don't have time to read the large number of emails
>>>>>>>> generated every day from the block size debate. A summary of the various
>>>>>>>> positions and arguments would be extremely helpful.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:02 PM, gabe appleton <
>>>>>>>> gappleto97@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, can we try to get a wiki page for the debate? That way we
>>>>>>>>> could condense the information as much as possible. I'll be willing to
>>>>>>>>> assist if the page gets approval.
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2015 6:41 PM, "Mats Henricson" <mats@henricson.se>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My fingers have been itching many times now, this debate
>>>>>>>>>> drives me nuts.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I just wish all posters could follow two simple principles:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1. Read up. Yes. All of what has been written. Yes, it will
>>>>>>>>>>    take many hours. But if you're rehashing what other
>>>>>>>>>>    smarter people have said over and over before, you're
>>>>>>>>>>    wasting hundreds of peoples time. Please don't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Be helpful. Suggest alternatives. Just cristizising is
>>>>>>>>>>    just destructive. If you want no change, then say so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mats
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8047 bytes --]