2

Genjix wrote about this in two recent posts. Here's one.

Some developers argue that with the issues being highly complex, that users have no say in the system’s core development

And the other:

Other developers disagree with giving this information away and feel like you as users should trust their judgement

Are there public expressions of some core developers that object to public scrutiny and participation in the decision-making process? Who, of the core team, has issued such opinions?

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

You misunderstand what the developers are saying. They are not saying that they object to pubic scrutiny and participation. They are saying that being a user of Bitcoin does not somehow specially qualify you to comment on the design or implementation of the Bitcoin system.

Improve this answer
7
  • Well, either way, I for one think that anyone can comment on whatever they want... Anyway, this better fits as a comment, because it doesn't really answer the question.
    – ripper234
    Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 8:42
  • 3
    It answers the question -- nobody on the core team has said they object to public scrutiny and participation. And yes, anyone can comment on whatever they want, no developer has said that "mere users" should be prohibited from commenting. They just find that it's generally a waste of time to read the comments. Good comments will percolate up by themselves into coherent proposals.
    – David Schwartz
    Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 8:44
  • The rephrase the question - who does @genjix refer to in his multiple quotes? Another quote: Other developers disagree with giving this information away and feel like you as users should trust their judgement bitcoinmedia.com/the-truth-behind-bip-16-and-17
    – ripper234
    Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 8:49
  • He only says "some developers" or "other developers". But he may be referring to the fact that miners vote on the P2SH proposal. Why don't you ask him what he means? Anyone else would have to guess.
    – David Schwartz
    Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 8:58
  • 1
    To conclude this rant - I simply think that facts are important, and should be public, including opinions that person X or Y publicly made about topic Z.
    – ripper234
    Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 9:50
2

Some posts that genjix might have referred to:

by theymos:

Miners (as a group) should not be given any say over issues like this. They do not necessarily know what the best option is. The issue should be decided by people very familiar with the protocol and the proposals.

I suggest that we compile a list of everyone who knows a lot about the Bitcoin protocol, invite them to a two-week discussion via email, and have those who participate in the discussion vote on the issue at the end of the two weeks. If one proposal gets enough votes (two-thirds, say), then Bitcoin clients will be programmed to apply the new restrictions ~3 months in the future. Miners will have to upgrade by then or their blocks will not be recognized by most clients. If there aren't enough votes for any proposal to pass, the issue will be shelved for a while.

by Technomage:

The bottom line is that non-technical people should have no say in an issue that is purely technical. This is technocratic democracy and it's simply the best way. All technical people should be invited to the discussion and then they can vote amongst themselves, simple as that. Then the results are made public and the miners will upgrade based on that, if the team decided to go forward with either BIP. There should of course be a vote for "neither".

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.