path: root/1e/258d0ccea7269178d716e5b82332beefea6270

Return-Path: <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7050AC002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon,  2 May 2022 03:17:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5747160C14
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon,  2 May 2022 03:17:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
 HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id HTpXBqRqEqOs
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon,  2 May 2022 03:17:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22d])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C399160B2D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon,  2 May 2022 03:17:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id y19so16960917ljd.4
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sun, 01 May 2022 20:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=dqzHKr+pb9PY275twwWQFMKT/YUuslrKPhppZIUL9bk=;
 b=QPMxqdA3GUsAgr6sMdMDxYJss1cz7bIUz73lMKFMay1bEgk1wkXpjUe48BlpkdpJee
 GaiTvoTjoH6rc/7Sq/U7KansBlEYYtm5Xhv0sb+iFcCwG6fBSCpclXgCmrZtVxTVGln+
 qliO0+cheDoZ7oHTXsDcsvnJh448UXuAqmAmVhY+2IgOf4zwwYICrRI2saIQTEwMb4GX
 wqTC2C/wCLgs64eO8tgLFbjvRnz8fgxh800oT5afKb5l4ZXUw1j7IpR8x91F7Gx5mhrk
 TiGJXOV+pXm8OvoEy8ND5VoHsRI/LspTelpmrVXPKXXh5tacgXnFRnwDID/LNO4M3QC0
 /FiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=dqzHKr+pb9PY275twwWQFMKT/YUuslrKPhppZIUL9bk=;
 b=4tueEdwv4M/V4hxXgPlKrB6PWM/3tOXoE+JmV+Fusi8KVCynDCzRta7iTH9nzB3X3Q
 W/KAN9s0PqyIvvSkIzyp9QzjZSFjWiw2jYKrXDJC/6GSU7dRJyKiQerF8EICRWMDoaj+
 /+d6rcnmn2Sd3RpGi3DAzTVneIWiMxY1hEDXx7/ZzhuGSJVgHevEvtF07swerM38cHOT
 fvG4GU9MZMw6l4C3JcKgB63uZz8LhIqOjKRW7M5jhC60mxwBXtAlAeTYfasGIYAY3nvj
 NzmY1B3oMSEMk/bISNLSYYI83QeNUW2lwQSCVQMGNjYnrVIVbh9G8L4OTn434GR3+4PZ
 vvtA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532my7tTWrK4O/oWyhz1OxcyvUjR1B6Q4qAZ/goghC9SIOFz961Z
 BKsifJX7+GOB8QAgh5VWZFiqqdEYbHLOCFoEZ6XJ7DSkXnk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxw8RFd2KZx2HZeYW6AhseEBwYiS6AHvBLpKTIB8+EnJSzqRdk97nxQsNT/LBGZwKjkKFU7lCXzUpjkB9P9FPc=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:bd17:0:b0:24b:4c2a:20c5 with SMTP id
 n23-20020a2ebd17000000b0024b4c2a20c5mr6894671ljq.422.1651461430198; Sun, 01
 May 2022 20:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Jeremy Rubin <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 20:16:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhhZN63PmxytFxKy=8KCZUxpDCV8j3kyNj7jVW3+aqcVNA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e847e005ddfed3e0"
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] On The Drama
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 03:17:14 -0000

--000000000000e847e005ddfed3e0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Developers,

I know that some of you may be interested in hearing my perspective on what
happened and why. I still do not know exactly what happened and why.
However, I can offer a brief explanation of what I perceived my main
actions to be and the response to them:

1. I published and shared to this list a blog post encouraging review on
viability of having a Speedy Trial (ST) with signalling beginning around
3.5 weeks (May 12th), in line with previously communicated materials.
2. I held a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss the viability of an
activation attempt, "The Agenda for the meeting will be an open discussion
on the possibility of activating CTV[CheckTemplateVerify] in 2022, why we
may or may not wish to do that, if we did want to do that what would need
to be done, what the path might look like if we do not do that."
3. If ST was deemed viable, I provided a pathway for sufficient review to
occur and I also wrote User Resisted Soft Fork(URSF) software to be used
such that miners are not unilaterally in control, as well as encouragement
for someone to author a User Activated Soft Fork(UASF) as a follow up if
miners "vetoed".
4. If ST was not viable, I gave encouragement to more thoroughly "re-evalua=
te
the design of CTV against alternatives that would take more time to prepare
engineering wise (e.g., more general covenants, small tweaks to CTV)"
5. I Made clear that CTV activation was "not a must. All actors must decide
if it=E2=80=99s in their own rational self-interest to have the soft-fork p=
roceed."
6. I provided a review of rationale for why I thought this to be the right
next step for CTV, and for future soft forks to follow.

Since I posted my blog, there have been a flurry of inaccurate claims
lobbed at me across various platforms that I am trying to route around
consensus, force miners to do a ST, force users to accept a patch they
don't want, calls for me to face various repercussions, attacks on my
character, and more. Anyone is free to read the material I actually
communicated myself and evaluate the claims of bad-faith being made. I
accept responsibility that ultimately I may not have communicated these
things clearly enough.

I've kept my word to listen to feedback on parameters before any release:

- I've not released binaries for a ST CTV client in May, and won't be.
- I've kept my promise not to run a UASF process.

I hope you can believe me that I am not trying to do anything wanton to
Bitcoin. I am trying to do my best to accurately communicate my exact
intentions and plans along the way, and learn from the ways I fell short.

I cannot thank enough the (majority!) of individuals who understand this
and have provided overwhelming amounts of personal support to me through
these last weeks. While I do not mistake that personal support for support
of my views, I wanted to share the depth of support and appreciation that
the community has for the difficult tasks developers engage in. This isn't
specific to me; the community has immense respect for the sacrifices every
developer makes in choosing to work on Bitcoin. The hate may be loud and
public on the shallow surface, but the love and support runs deep.

At the same time, it has been eye opening for me to see the processes by
which a kernel of disinformation blossoms into a panic across the Bitcoin
community. For any Bitcoin contributor who might engage in consensus
processes: Agree or disagree with the quality of my actions, it's worth
spending a little time to trace how the response to my proposal was
instigated so that you harden your own defenses against such disinformation
campaigns in the future. I encourage you to look closely at what various
"respected members of the community" have lobbied for because they
represent dangerous precedents for all Bitcoin developers. I've yet to
fully form my thoughts around this.

If you do not think that my actions lived up with my perception of them,
feel free to give me, either publicly or privately, any feedback on how I
can do better going forward.

With respect to this thread, I'll read whatever you send, but I won't be
reply-all'ing here as I view this as largely off-topic for this list,
unless anyone feels strongly otherwise.

Best,

Jeremy



--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>

--000000000000e847e005ddfed3e0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,he=
lvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000"><div class=3D"gmail_defau=
lt">Developers,</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"g=
mail_default">I know that some of you may be interested in hearing my persp=
ective on what happened and why. I still do not know exactly what happened =
and why. However, I can offer a brief explanation of what I perceived my ma=
in actions to be and the response to them:</div><div class=3D"gmail_default=
"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">1. I published and shared to this =
list a blog post encouraging review on viability of having a Speedy Trial (=
ST) with signalling beginning around 3.5 weeks (May 12th), in line with pre=
viously communicated materials.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default">2. I held=
 a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss the viability of an activation at=
tempt, &quot;The Agenda for the<span class=3D"gmail-Apple-converted-space">=
=C2=A0</span><span class=3D"gmail-il">meeting</span><span class=3D"gmail-Ap=
ple-converted-space">=C2=A0</span>will be an open=C2=A0discussion on the po=
ssibility of activating CTV[CheckTemplateVerify] in 2022, why we may or may=
 not wish to do that, if we did want to do that what would need to be done,=
 what the path might look like if we do not do that.&quot;</div><div class=
=3D"gmail_default">3. If ST was deemed viable, I provided a pathway for suf=
ficient review to occur and I also wrote User Resisted Soft Fork(URSF) soft=
ware to be used such that miners are not unilaterally in control, as well a=
s encouragement for someone to author a User Activated Soft Fork(UASF) as a=
 follow up if miners &quot;vetoed&quot;.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default">=
<font color=3D"#000000" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">4. If ST was =
not viable, I gave=C2=A0encouragement to more thoroughly &quot;</font>re-ev=
aluate the design of CTV against alternatives that would take more time to =
prepare engineering wise (e.g., more general covenants, small tweaks to CTV=
)&quot;</div>5. I Made clear that CTV activation was &quot;not a must. All =
actors must decide if it=E2=80=99s in their own rational self-interest to h=
ave the soft-fork proceed.&quot;<div><div class=3D"gmail_default">6. I prov=
ided a review of rationale for why I thought this to be the right next step=
 for CTV, and for future soft forks to follow.</div><div class=3D"gmail_def=
ault"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">Since I posted my blog, there =
have been a flurry of inaccurate claims lobbed at me across various platfor=
ms that I am trying to route around consensus, force miners to do a ST, for=
ce users to accept a patch they don&#39;t want, calls for me to face variou=
s repercussions, attacks on my character, and more. Anyone is free to read =
the material I actually communicated myself and evaluate the claims of bad-=
faith being made. I accept responsibility that ultimately I may not have co=
mmunicated these things clearly enough.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><=
br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><div class=3D"gmail_default">I&#39;ve=
 kept my word to listen to feedback on parameters before any release:</div>=
<div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">- I&#39=
;ve not released binaries for a ST CTV client in May, and won&#39;t be.</di=
v><div class=3D"gmail_default">- I&#39;ve kept my promise not to run a UASF=
 process.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_d=
efault">I hope you can believe me that I am not trying to do anything wanto=
n to Bitcoin. I=C2=A0am trying to do my best to accurately communicate my e=
xact intentions and plans along the way, and learn from the ways I fell sho=
rt.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default=
">I cannot thank enough the (majority!) of individuals who understand=C2=A0=
this and have provided overwhelming amounts of personal support to me throu=
gh these last weeks. While I do not mistake that personal support for suppo=
rt of my views, I wanted to share the depth of support and appreciation tha=
t the community has for the difficult tasks developers engage in. This isn&=
#39;t specific to me; the community has immense respect for the sacrifices =
every developer makes in choosing to work on Bitcoin. The hate may be loud =
and public on the shallow surface, but the love and support runs deep.<br c=
lass=3D"gmail-Apple-interchange-newline"></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"=
></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_def=
ault">At the same time, it has been eye opening for me to see the processes=
 by which a kernel of disinformation blossoms into a panic across the Bitco=
in community. For any Bitcoin contributor who might engage in consensus pro=
cesses: Agree or disagree with the quality of my actions, it&#39;s worth sp=
ending a little time to trace how the response to my proposal was instigate=
d so that you harden your own defenses against such disinformation campaign=
s in the future. I encourage you to look closely at what various &quot;resp=
ected members of the community&quot; have lobbied for because they represen=
t dangerous precedents for all Bitcoin developers. I&#39;ve yet to fully fo=
rm my thoughts around this.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><di=
v class=3D"gmail_default"><div class=3D"gmail_default">If you do not think =
that my actions lived up with my perception of them, feel free to give me, =
either publicly or privately, any feedback on how I can do better going for=
ward.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_defau=
lt">With respect to this thread, I&#39;ll read whatever you send, but I won=
&#39;t be reply-all&#39;ing here as I view this as largely off-topic for th=
is list, unless anyone=C2=A0feels strongly otherwise.</div></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">Best,</div><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">Jeremy</div><=
div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></di=
v><div class=3D"gmail_default"></div></div></div><br clear=3D"all"><div><di=
v dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature">=
<div dir=3D"ltr">--<br><a href=3D"https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin" target=
=3D"_blank">@JeremyRubin</a><br></div></div></div></div>

--000000000000e847e005ddfed3e0--