MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EpwH6R7Ol7S4DZ4r_UcSSMU9RysZiRHFKZ2WkWZatUIeU9YE9avRZ-YIiafnf6I6U4tBbEu5xHa4JwcGh0fxMuyY-fGMwpaesfo5XK6SzLc=@protonmail.com>
 <WtHCNGNhHAWBer9QnaWajdbJ341jMHQJa23WAPgNaRldKhopPIN7ry8wNAnmfnlAK6j0m7p3NEgckA6kIjWV5_rFla63Bh6HCfAlLHFODsE=@protonmail.com>
 <CABm2gDrQXbS=i8j+Ja5PTgYekyH2X06eTOs8SXP8X-dhTy-hiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMnpzfoLTecKQPmdDv7B=_JKgh1LZr_K5aahZ6JA5CsGbvomkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABm2gDp6YvV0ZLgW2Mzp8LivMM-KWjAA4ZmV1XO-6R+WuD9zEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZUoKnaj9eOkWcn5NaSJb+NtCe=5Uv_FZR-VAqR0De68G33hA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMZUoKnaj9eOkWcn5NaSJb+NtCe=5Uv_FZR-VAqR0De68G33hA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 00:44:24 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDooJ=HHmNdwncrthOn1deoCojhEUusWnNj_0ASsq9wybg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.com>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000059355a05de5f9a0e"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] What to do when contentious soft fork activations
 are attempted
Precedence: list

--00000000000059355a05de5f9a0e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

So, to be clear, you didn't design speedy trial "to make everyone unhappy"
as Ryan claims, no?
That's a really strange claim on his part.
When the grace period for slower activation after lock in was added, I
don't think it was added to make me or people like me who dislike that
proposal unhappy. On the contrary, I think the goal was precisely to
address some of our concerns.
But it doesn't address them all, as I've tried to explain other times.
I truly think you wanted to make everyone happy with speedy trial, but you
didn't do it, sorry.
I know it' not a lack of capacity because you did impressive and genius
things like simplicity.
But despite your best intentions and your great capacity, I still think
speedy trial is a very bad proposal because you got the analysis wrong.
Let me reiterate that this is not attack against you, but only against one
of your ideas.
Sorry if I sounded sarcastic, but I was trying to be sarcastic with ryan,
not with you.


On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 8:24 PM Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:01 PM Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Russell O'Connor wrote the definitive explanation for how ST arose in
>>> the consensus process and how it was designed to make everyone
>>> unhappy.  It's a great explanation of what we went through last year.
>>>
>>>   https://r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html
>>>
>>>     "On Building Consensus and Speedy Trial"
>>>
>>>     on | 2021-06-15T19:14:22Z
>>>     by | Russell O'Connor
>>>
>>
>> That's a lot of text, are you sure he said in there he designed speedy
>> trial to make everyone unhappy?
>> Well, if we're still talking about it, that proves that it failed at its
>> own design criterion of failing fast.
>>
>
> Quoting from https://r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html:
>
> > Speedy Trial=E2=80=99s design is not based on any sort of activation ph=
ilosophy
> about failing fast.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--00000000000059355a05de5f9a0e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>So, to be clear, you didn&#39;t design speedy trial &=
quot;to make everyone unhappy&quot; as Ryan claims, no?</div><div>That&#39;=
s a really strange claim on his part.</div><div>When the grace period for s=
lower activation after lock in was added, I don&#39;t think it was added to=
 make me or people like me who dislike that proposal unhappy. On the contra=
ry, I think the goal was precisely to address some of our concerns.</div><d=
iv>But it doesn&#39;t address them all, as I&#39;ve tried to explain other =
times. <br></div><div>I truly think you wanted to make everyone happy with =
speedy trial, but you didn&#39;t do it, sorry.</div><div>I know it&#39; not=
 a lack of capacity because you did impressive and genius things like simpl=
icity.<br></div><div>But despite your best intentions and your great capaci=
ty, I still think speedy trial is a very bad proposal because you got the a=
nalysis wrong.<br></div><div>Let me reiterate that this is not attack again=
st you, but only against one of your ideas.</div><div>Sorry if I sounded sa=
rcastic, but I was trying to be sarcastic with ryan, not with you.</div><di=
v><br></div><div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" clas=
s=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 8:24 PM Russell O&#39;Connor via bi=
tcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitc=
oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote=
"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:01 PM Jorg=
e Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxf=
oundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&=
gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px =
solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Russell O&#39;Connor wrote the definitive explanation for how ST arose in<b=
r>
the consensus process and how it was designed to make everyone<br>
unhappy.=C2=A0 It&#39;s a great explanation of what we went through last ye=
ar.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 <a href=3D"https://r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html" rel=3D"noreferr=
er" target=3D"_blank">https://r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html</a><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 &quot;On Building Consensus and Speedy Trial&quot;<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 on | 2021-06-15T19:14:22Z<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 by | Russell O&#39;Connor<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div=
>That&#39;s a lot of text, are you sure he said in there he designed speedy=
 trial to make everyone unhappy?</div><div>Well, if we&#39;re still talking=
 about it, that proves that it failed at its own design criterion of failin=
g fast.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Quoting from <a h=
ref=3D"https://r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html" target=3D"_blank">https://=
r6.ca/blog/20210615T191422Z.html</a>:</div><div><br></div><div>&gt; Speedy =
Trial=E2=80=99s design is not based on any sort of activation philosophy ab=
out failing fast.=C2=A0 </div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>

--00000000000059355a05de5f9a0e--