Tasoshi> hi, is the bitcoin-dev mailing list meant to be cross-implementation?

* Beef has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: yes

<Tasoshi> would it then be appropriate to have on the moderating list contributors from other implementations?

<Tasoshi> or clients

* ghtdak has quit (Quit: WeeChat 1.4-dev)

<Lauda> Anyone up for a question in regards to libsecp256k1 and the problem of validation time (at 2 MB block size limit)? I just can't remember the answer.

<Lauda> Not sure whether this channel is the right one.

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: probably. most of the moderators aren't Core devs FWIW

<Luke-Jr> (in fact, I'm not sure if any are..)

<Tasoshi> to avoid any potential bias in moderation however, would it not be more appropriate to have prominent contributors to other implementations on the mailing list, such as andrew stone for example or jonathan toomim if of course they up for it

<Tasoshi> btw I am misusing implementation - I mean client or and implementation

* Dizzle (~Dizzle@104-6-36-162.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net) has joined

* RoboTeddy (~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined

<Tasoshi> otherwise the bitcoin-dev mailing list may seem somewhat biased and a "bitcoin-core" list which may make cross-cooperation difficult

* RoboTeddy has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: Toomim certainly seems like not appropriate for being a moderator, but maybe Stone (I don't know him well)

* Dizzle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: the head mod is Jeff Garzik, who works on Classic

* Dizzle (~Dizzle@104-6-36-162.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net) has joined

<Tasoshi> he is extremely busy however. Andrew Stone is the lead dev of bitcoin unlimited

<Tasoshi> why is Jonathan toomim not appropriate?

* OneFixt has quit (Remote host closed the connection)

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: he basically thinks he is superior to everyone else and that everyone must obey him, and he isn't even competent. major ego problems.

<Tasoshi> that sounds highly opinionated

<Tasoshi> and of course not your opinion or say

<Tasoshi> the point is whether bitcoin-dev mailing list is cross-client and if so then the moderators should be from many clients

* ongolaBoy has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: or rather, what clients they contribute to is not a basis for discrimination

<Tasoshi> it is, if one looks at if from a discrimination perspective

<Luke-Jr> considering the lead mod is a Classic dev, and none of the mods are Core devs, despite Core being the only really significant implementation, I think there's a clear lack of bias in favour of Core

<Tasoshi> if there is to be no bias, then contributors to other clients should have a moderating say

* Beef (~beef@unaffiliated/beef) has joined

<Tasoshi> I disagree, the mailing list, if not in actuality, is perceived to be highly biased

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: such perception has no basis in reality

<Luke-Jr> no basis at all

<Tasoshi> plus, no one precludes a core dev being included in the moderation pannel

<Tasoshi> that's your opinion :)

<Luke-Jr> just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean they become opinions.

<Tasoshi> what I am trying to establish is a working relationship based on perceived fairness if bitcoin-dev mailing list is to be truly cross client

<Tasoshi> in any reasonable view, for the mailing list to be truly cross client, it needs to have on the moderating panel contributors to different clients, that means core, classic, unlimited and xt

<Tasoshi> if not jonathan from classic, then tom hardin I think his name is, "tomz"

* priidu has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)

<btcdrak> The bitcoin-dev mailing list is for Bitcoin protocol discussion.

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: moderation isn't a competition

<Tasoshi> doesn't really matter, as long as they're not extremely busy and practically unable to moderate

<Tasoshi> I agree

<Tasoshi> but moderation can be very biased

<Luke-Jr> generally not

<Tasoshi> that's your opinion

<dgenr8> tomz is tom zander

<Luke-Jr> frankly, if we ever got to the point where bias mattered, the moderators are going too far

<Tasoshi> thank you

<Tasoshi> some say they are Luke-jr

<Tasoshi> now maybe they wrong, it doesn't really matter

<Luke-Jr> it does matter

<Tasoshi> as I said I am trying to establish a working relationship

<Luke-Jr> people making up utter rubbish FUD should simply be ignored

<Tasoshi> and by any reasonable analysis, if the mailing list is to be cross client, then it needs on the moderating list contributors from different clients

<Luke-Jr> which it has

<Tasoshi> it has no one from bitcoin unlimited

<Tasoshi> or xt

<Tasoshi> or btcd

<Luke-Jr> so?

<Luke-Jr> it has people from different clients

<Tasoshi> Luke, I am not here to argue

<Tasoshi> as I said, I am here to propose a working relationship

<Tasoshi> if you do not with to be co-operative that is fine

<Luke-Jr> …

<Luke-Jr> the only ones not being co-operative, are the ones spreading FUD and/or not participating

<Tasoshi> but, if the mailing list is to be cross client in any reasonable analysis it needs to have on the moderating list contributors to different clients so that the moderator's actions are not biased

<Tasoshi> we need, in my view, to distill the political aspects from just code

<Luke-Jr> Andrew Stone recently began to reach out, and I encouraged more cooperation.

<Tasoshi> sure, on political aspects there is disagreement, but on many aspects we need to co-operate

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: we already have that

<Tasoshi> and we need to establish a basis on how that co-operation is to be carried out

<Tasoshi> for any such co-operation there must be not only bias, but not even the possibility of bias, there must be checks and balances

<Tasoshi> which is set by contributors to different clients being on the moderating pannel

<Chris_Stewart_5> when verifying sigs for a p2sh/multisig input sigs are always assumed to be in order right?

<Tasoshi> Luke-Jr, developers from other clients can not co-operate on a mailing list that may act as a podium

<Tasoshi> if you wish to co-operate you have to set up checks and balances

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: take your politics somewhere else. the ML is not where they belong.

<Tasoshi> the ball is on you really

<Tasoshi> but it is

* Xanather has quit (Quit: Leaving)

<Tasoshi> the moderators of the mailing list can be highly biased towards a client

<Tasoshi> that is why you need moderators who are not super busy from different clients to balance any potential bias

<Luke-Jr> everyone *is* super busy, which is why the majority of the moderators don't work on *any* client

<Tasoshi> are you rejecting my proposal?

<Tasoshi> not that you have any say of course, being just one guy

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: I am rejecting your continued wasting of my time here. goodbye.

<Tasoshi> then don't claim the mailing list is cross client

<Luke-Jr> it is, so I will continue to claim so

<Tasoshi> or that the bip process is cross client

<moli> Tasoshi: go away

<Luke-Jr> it also is

<Tasoshi> that's your opinion

<Luke-Jr> no, it is the fact

<moli> Tasoshi: you've been wasting core devs' time too much, go away

<Tasoshi> you have no monopoly on facts

* jaclupi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)

<Luke-Jr> I don't. You could have facts too if you didn't so vehemently reject them.

<Tasoshi> unless you can give me some certain mathematical equation to prove it then it is simply your opinion

<moli> as if you can understand maths?

<Tasoshi> good to know bitcoin core devs have no desire whatever to co-operate however

<Tasoshi> that was necessary information

<Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: you reveal your utter dishonesty when you go forward spreading such absolute lies like that

<jonasschnelli> guys,.. this type of conversation does not belong here. Its a tech/dev channel.

<Tasoshi> so is the mailing list

<Tasoshi> how cross clients co-operate is pretty tech