This is a long post that hopefully bridges some gaps between technical people (devs) and non-technical users and how they look at spam prevention in Bitcoin. I hope that it clarifies why I think that ...
I love you Calle but this is just another post of "let me trying to explain better the technical argument cause you didn't get it well enough" which does not add anything new to the converstaion and that is not addressing the real issues IMO. Thi spost it's just another proof that core, after 5 months, still has not understood where is the disconnect with its users.
Most ppl have perfectly understood the technical rational proposed by core but they still DISAGREE on this change. Some people think the potential dangers are noth worth the potential rewards, some people perceive this as another "let's accomodate a little bit more" spammers, some people think the increase from 80 to 100k is too much, some people agree with the change but have been spooked by some core devs attitude.
If core really want to gain some of the trust it has clearly lost, it needs to stop focusing only on keep repeating its technical motivations, and direct the focus somehwere else. I can assure you that this core fiasco is not due to insufficient clarity/explanation of its technical motivations, but rather to:
1) management of the whole issue from day 1 (see github banning and open-close PR)
2) core devs reaction to users not liking this change (good god man, the reaction screamed authoritarian all over with sprinkle of arrogance, childish behaviour and ad ominem attack)
3) the most fervent advocates of this change have been Antoine (creator of PR, makes sense), Jameson Loop, Shinobi, Peter Todd. The last 3 names are probalby the least "loved" devs in existance (for some fair reasons), and they are the one who have pushed for this change the most (podcasts, live debates on YT). From a public relations perspective this was the worst possible way to handle it
4) Core went from "if you don't like the change just switch implementation" to assiduosly (and quite desperately honestly) trying to get back ppl once they saw many more ppl than they thought switched implementation. Then you did not really mean what you said about "just switch if you don't like it, we are cool", cause you clearly are not cool with it
I already wrote 3 times (the first in May when this all started) to core devs to help them understand they need to get out of their tecno-bubble and stop refusing to cosider any factor that is not technical. Nodes are managed by human beings, and human beings have emotions, sensations and trust. If you do not incorporate this aspects in comunicating/handling your technical decisions, this is just the first of many horrible managed issue. If you really want to reconnect with your users it's not about another technical explanation, listen to the feedback people are providing man
Peace and love
Most ppl have perfectly understood the technical rational proposed by core but they still DISAGREE on this change. Some people think the potential dangers are noth worth the potential rewards, some people perceive this as another "let's accomodate a little bit more" spammers, some people think the increase from 80 to 100k is too much, some people agree with the change but have been spooked by some core devs attitude.
If core really want to gain some of the trust it has clearly lost, it needs to stop focusing only on keep repeating its technical motivations, and direct the focus somehwere else. I can assure you that this core fiasco is not due to insufficient clarity/explanation of its technical motivations, but rather to:
1) management of the whole issue from day 1 (see github banning and open-close PR)
2) core devs reaction to users not liking this change (good god man, the reaction screamed authoritarian all over with sprinkle of arrogance, childish behaviour and ad ominem attack)
3) the most fervent advocates of this change have been Antoine (creator of PR, makes sense), Jameson Loop, Shinobi, Peter Todd. The last 3 names are probalby the least "loved" devs in existance (for some fair reasons), and they are the one who have pushed for this change the most (podcasts, live debates on YT). From a public relations perspective this was the worst possible way to handle it
4) Core went from "if you don't like the change just switch implementation" to assiduosly (and quite desperately honestly) trying to get back ppl once they saw many more ppl than they thought switched implementation. Then you did not really mean what you said about "just switch if you don't like it, we are cool", cause you clearly are not cool with it
I already wrote 3 times (the first in May when this all started) to core devs to help them understand they need to get out of their tecno-bubble and stop refusing to cosider any factor that is not technical. Nodes are managed by human beings, and human beings have emotions, sensations and trust. If you do not incorporate this aspects in comunicating/handling your technical decisions, this is just the first of many horrible managed issue. If you really want to reconnect with your users it's not about another technical explanation, listen to the feedback people are providing man
Peace and love
❤️3❤️1👍1📖1