MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160623121000.GA20073@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAJowKg+zYtUnHv+ea--srehVa5K46sjpWbHVcVGRY5x0w5XRTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160621221347.GC10196@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CABqynxJCiXL0djx+xt9i=HJqC=0=5sZ9ecL7k1_a_XHiJ8qibw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160623105632.GB19241@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CAPg+sBg90FxbEy1smp9mn+djF-N6PdUprtQ7r_kgvKCGbTHndQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160623113904.GA19686@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CAPg+sBiqh80Q4Dfm0y6aEX+gHrcHZMq3tckejx8KDCPb-ikkOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160623121000.GA20073@fedora-21-dvm>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 14:16:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBgCkD_54p10NgfDozFo+dNnm-mL1B=NyGYpkdrXgTtxUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11403bd83faf290535f107c7
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Even more proposed BIP extensions to BIP 0070
Precedence: list

--001a11403bd83faf290535f107c7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Jun 23, 2016 14:10, "Peter Todd" <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:

> Right, so you accept that we'll exert some degree of editorial control;
the
> question now is what editorial policies should we exert?

No, I do not. I am saying that some degree of editorial control will
inevitably exist, simply because there is some human making the choice of
assigning a BIP number and merging. My opinion is that we should try to
restrict that editorial control to only be subject to objective process,
and not be dependent on personal opinions.

> My argument is that rejecting BIP75 is something we should do on
> ethical/strategic grounds. You may disagree with that, but please don't
troll
> and call that "advocating censorship"

I think that you are free to express dislike of BIP75. Suggesting to remove
it for that reason is utterly ridiculous to me, whatever you want to call
it.

-- 
Pieter

--001a11403bd83faf290535f107c7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Jun 23, 2016 14:10, &quot;Peter Todd&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pete@pe=
tertodd.org">pete@petertodd.org</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt; Right, so you accept that we&#39;ll exert some degree o=
f editorial control; the<br>
&gt; question now is what editorial policies should we exert?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">No, I do not. I am saying that some degree of editorial cont=
rol will inevitably exist, simply because there is some human making the ch=
oice of assigning a BIP number and merging. My opinion is that we should tr=
y to restrict that editorial control to only be subject to objective proces=
s, and not be dependent on personal opinions.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt; My argument is that rejecting BIP75 is something we sho=
uld do on<br>
&gt; ethical/strategic grounds. You may disagree with that, but please don&=
#39;t troll<br>
&gt; and call that &quot;advocating censorship&quot;</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I think that you are free to express dislike of BIP75. Sugge=
sting to remove it for that reason is utterly ridiculous to me, whatever yo=
u want to call it.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">-- <br>
Pieter<br>
</p>

--001a11403bd83faf290535f107c7--