Wouldn't this be entirely on topic for #bitcoin-dev? It's probably better
not to fragment the communication channels and associated infrastructure
(logs, bots, etc.)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hello, folks.
>
>
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Wouldn't this be entirely on topic for #bitcoin-dev? It's probably better
> not to fragment the communication channels and associated infrastructure
> (logs, bots, etc.)
Yeah, I a
Thanks for your comments Luke.
> Are you saying your proposal is intentionally not intended to reflect the
reality?
That's right. I want to be able to include more voices and be able to get a
clearer idea of acceptance then the process currently has available.
This process should work alongside
This seems like a good place to point out that attempts to identify
individuals (either by name or simply as an individual human being) are
futile as well as destructive. "1%" usually means "one out of every 100
people" but this requires identification of individuals as individuals.
One person can
Hello, folks.
I wanted to let all of you know a new IRC channel has been created called
#segwit-dev where we welcome all discussion pertaining to integrating and
supporting segregated witness transactions in wallets as well as comments or
suggestions for improvement to the spec. Please come joi