Who do you mean by "the non technical folks"? You don't include alicexbt or yourself as a "technical folk", do you?
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 8:38 AM Billy Tetrud via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Wholeheartedly agree with you alicexbt. There are no technical issues that > have been shown that I'm aware of. Once the non-technical folks have time > to discuss it and realize that, I'm hopeful things will move forward. > Perhaps we can learn from this and figure out how to better catch the > attention of the larger bitcoin community for important changes without > alarming them. > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 2:48 AM alicexbt via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Hi Jorge, >> >> >> Misinformation is false or inaccurate information, especially that which >> is deliberately intended to deceive. A combination of 'misleading' and >> 'information'. Here are a few examples and I am sure I missed a lot of >> others but its difficult for me to keep a track of everything: >> >> >> 1) Sapio is open source and everything mentioned in tweet is false: >> https://web.archive.org/web/20220503050140/https://twitter.com/coinableS/status/1521354192434073602 >> >> 2) Personal attacks on author of BIP 119 with false information: >> https://nitter.net/s3cp256k1/status/1521238634111770624 >> >> 3) Andreas Antonopoulos shared false things about CTV and explained by >> Ryan in this email: >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-May/020414.html >> >> 4) Misleading things shared in these emails by Michael Folkson: >> >> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-January/019728.html >> >> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020235.html >> >> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020286.html >> >> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020343.html >> >> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020386.html >> >> 5) Peter Todd and Zac shared misleading things about BIP 119, bitcoin and >> L2. I replied in this email: >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020322.html >> >> 6) Social media influencers like Peter McCormack tweeted they don't >> understand BIP 119 but its an attack (this was even retweeted by developers >> like Peter Todd): >> https://nitter.net/PeterMcCormack/status/1521253840963653632 >> >> 7) Some misconceptions about BIP 119 cleared by Bitcoin Magazine: >> https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/what-is-bip-119-bitcoin-controversy-explained >> >> 8) There were lies and misinformation about BIP 119 on social media >> according to this Bitcoin Magazine article: >> https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/analyzing-bip119-and-the-controversy-surrounding-it >> >> 9) John Carvalho tweeting false things: >> >> https://nitter.net/BitcoinErrorLog/status/1468599535538745359 >> >> https://nitter.net/BitcoinErrorLog/status/1522652884218822658 >> >> https://nitter.net/BitcoinErrorLog/status/1442554615967354880 >> >> https://nitter.net/search?q=MIT%20(from%3ABitcoinErrorLog) >> >> 10) Greg Maxwell responding to misinformation related to BIP 119 but >> adding false things in the comments: >> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/uim560/bip_119/i7dhfpb/ >> >> >> I am not surprised by your email but it would be better if the people who >> are interested in reviewing BIP 119 could raise the bar and not share >> misleading information. >> >> >> /dev/fd0 >> >> >> Sent with Proton Mail secure email. >> ------- Original Message ------- >> On Sunday, June 5th, 2022 at 12:12 AM, Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> >> wrote: >> >> >> > "Some people say CTV is contentious, but they're spreading >> misinformation"? Really? Seriously?Come on, guys, we can do better than >> nina jankovich and the "fact checkers". >> > Please, rise the bar. >> > On Fri, Jun 3, 2022, 19:44 alicexbt via bitcoin-dev < >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> > >> > > Note: This email is an opinion and not an attack on bitcoin >> > > >> > > Covenants on bitcoin will eventually be implemented with a soft fork. >> CTV is the easiest and best possible way OP_TX looks good as well. Apart >> from the technical merits, covenants will improve a few other things: >> > > >> > > - Developers can build interesting projects with real demand in >> market. >> > > - Students learn Sapio and not just solidity. >> > > - Better tooling could be available for application developers. >> > > - Maybe we see bitcoin developer hackathons in different countries. >> > > - Demand for block space might increase, it wont be just exchanges >> and coinjoin. >> > > - Funding of bitcoin developers and projects might improve. Wont need >> to convince a few people for grants. >> > > >> > > **Why covenants are not contentious?** >> > > >> > > Some people may write paragraphs about CTV being contentious, spread >> misinformation and do all types of drama, politics etc. on social media but >> there are zero technical NACKs for CTV. We have discussed other covenant >> proposals in detail on mailing list and IRC meetings with an open minded >> approach. >> > > >> > > All the developers that participated in the discussion are either >> okay with CTV or OP_TX or covenants in general. >> > > >> > > **How and when should covenants be implemented in Bitcoin?** >> > > >> > > I don't think we should wait for years anticipating a proposal that >> everyone will agree on or argue for years to pretend changes are hard in >> Bitcoin. We should improve the review process for soft fork BIPs and share >> honest opinions with agreement, disagreement on technical merits. >> > > >> > > I prefer BIP 8 or improved BIP 8 for soft fork but I won't mind >> anything else being used if that improves Bitcoin. Covenants implemented in >> Bitcoin before the next cycle would provide opportunity for developers to >> build interesting things during the bear market. Ossification supporters >> also believe there is some window that will close soon, maybe doing changes >> considering each case individually will be a better approach. CTV is not a >> rushed soft fork, less people followed the research and it was not >> mentioned on social media repeatedly by the respected developers like other >> soft forks. >> > > >> > > /dev/fd0 >> > > >> > > >> > > Sent with Proton Mail secure email. >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > bitcoin-dev mailing list >> > > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
