path: root/ac/2c05f811228c9d3cd0ecea2461b328df486bbc

Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 14:30:58 -0700
Received: from mail-oa1-f64.google.com ([209.85.160.64])
	by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <bitcoindev+bncBD2LZ3P65UNRBBXJ23DAMGQERTSAK5A@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1v1tYH-0002tj-E4
	for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 14:30:58 -0700
Received: by mail-oa1-f64.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-368e47ea3afsf1018740fac.1
        for <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 14:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1758835851; x=1759440651; darn=gnusha.org;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
         :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:sender:from
         :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=8ZE//ykn0VCFhZ5ind02gMQ2qCCvm/CtmG6JQjtnYso=;
        b=m7nPwYnO+EXiUbNWu090eQJuP3dOd5HhfE6MsX+KTwl8noowF9BVYSeBa88+a3pa6s
         MD3ThA7iIXjpt3Le6GUIrrTsH7Av3cjU5bjY0BlOar+9JcEXQY1VVB15bS8t/BXm1tf8
         vqhyQ+lMy/VORgNJPIOIlv1PItM9Q9qoqBHnuSiz0PcFqyqznLs/O6FneaRbyP2549ZM
         av6M0xwCCtgHzHT/zCblql5xlEjbunhA26lvnCRsRNJR2opnPvmEtNdSUKc97TrqznAd
         rXI89AUc1eq1/fHkMA555Ve0tk52O4L1bx7uI2cVfynTDcxvZVZC1r+MAb1U86omoI4M
         6Rcg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1758835851; x=1759440651; darn=gnusha.org;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
         :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:from:to:cc
         :subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=8ZE//ykn0VCFhZ5ind02gMQ2qCCvm/CtmG6JQjtnYso=;
        b=iuUHVPrpVLJvlpkzKdJbjLjNlhrRyz85i8ok2DNa6Uj1E6bc8a6iBUdS4OhXNKWurl
         D/euDEsHx4QPSSdHGNogZ/LJ7zObkKViMi53bVd+A76CCcmM2fQt1TU7u8ukHvmTRmeB
         K0/58oKOanBmIcsRah8zpZfQmPSQCkizuX20l2eZJFaRYJf3uofaanycOINB87hQimLX
         eJ3FQLLAAFmhwTL0TgJaT5jeI7AJ6jkZDwPBJJuRlPcreu1kCe3h6k0K+rWrAHH/2MLl
         mP5r0lOsKtmYtzd0oG6Ed4MDCZbQhdB4OnhDuMYwxHpePzTl8toDGpptJj4HCDNzQvlb
         oJaQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1758835851; x=1759440651;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
         :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:x-beenthere
         :x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
         :reply-to;
        bh=8ZE//ykn0VCFhZ5ind02gMQ2qCCvm/CtmG6JQjtnYso=;
        b=KGr9IFlTihSlNEhFYfNkgmngYzG5c6mt5DGNlln5eShYoSl70I5hVd5t2QEGFFGmVY
         vih83a3g5gi2yK5bfGDqscJFSWF/qtt0jgea8dFQwpEIQJpEcJLnLopEDRU7VnXvXVeu
         SQ0xOf8DdmEhwaF4wDARnuEBf0b2oRHjylPSBDnwUmFDuqNm3OxqKvqNVkXnISD5N2Bz
         22Wpo2yDj8R4c26MIBUW6ueBLthCA36bBkn2Sq7USXfm4tZEsJXCVil6u2kqC4Vn4I9j
         oGYvsAlrcBKXGd58mxJ473HLbIAwJszt2lGM065GobYbmiJgF7zuS3uwoZ7IrAyqwQEn
         9ohQ==
Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVv0BCy41nsMtUpdf9/3OJJz6TbGftuZhnt/TweFWIchcmkyIiJWiB+BbTeO3RVQtybyDPqVGnhx/qD@gnusha.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy9GJNCWS2RGqnKhoTcH1Ar2oq5Al8JsKBRckyWS9efAPjvmIwS
	bHFDtoqKqtWzjFgVeHaV5HFD4z+vzV18QR6oIOSgu4mrf84Ym7gBHlpa
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEkPTgW+s03ABjKGL6KJFvq8nvSxCCMcRYm3ji4lROuGMfGj85j8BpNX6va69J/mJtcUkkVmQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:3313:b0:319:c278:4a6 with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-35ef0d3f931mr2770302fac.44.1758835850786;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 14:30:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h="ARHlJd4lhfJTvlpod5FDqZOcg9P0VvAInz1y6RTMMAcAV1Uf4w=="
Received: by 2002:a05:6871:3206:b0:34c:97cf:52e with SMTP id
 586e51a60fabf-35ef1129798ls502089fac.2.-pod-prod-02-us; Thu, 25 Sep 2025
 14:30:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:11d1:b0:43f:285a:ee4c with SMTP id 5614622812f47-43f4cea1d5bmr2616348b6e.38.1758835846493;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 14:30:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 2002:a05:690c:4a05:b0:725:2535:e36 with SMTP id 00721157ae682-75e1de5491fms7b3;
        Wed, 24 Sep 2025 19:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:5204:b0:762:772b:917d with SMTP id 00721157ae682-764081070f3mr11101287b3.49.1758766839337;
        Wed, 24 Sep 2025 19:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 19:20:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: bigshiny <bigshiny90@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <c26c2e30-3a74-4afa-b6b8-209c711b8167n@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSCORx7DHD6NCynh2rhnRbFgofLShZdqD9QwWO3fxyRWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n@googlegroups.com>
 <CAAS2fgRFP+BJUZR7h01=7=qamD5qEW6OYJikTMR=5RkxTCEMZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAANnUzf4SfgcixLuS0Uwe6pNyFWAtufzLuJrDdpnBwyU2bU7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAS2fgSCORx7DHD6NCynh2rhnRbFgofLShZdqD9QwWO3fxyRWw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] [BIP Proposal] Mempool Validation and Relay Policies
 via User-Defined Scripts
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_5364_589186089.1758766838963"
X-Original-Sender: bigshiny90@gmail.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bitcoindev.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512
List-Post: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/post>, <mailto:bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <https://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bitcoindev+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev
List-Subscribe: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>, <mailto:bitcoindev+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+786775582512+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)

------=_Part_5364_589186089.1758766838963
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_5365_1715934081.1758766838963"

------=_Part_5365_1715934081.1758766838963
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I believe the proper framing of this situation is =E2=80=98distributed auto=
nomy=E2=80=99=20
not =E2=80=98distributed authoritarianism=E2=80=99 - which is incredibly mi=
sleading and=20
completely incorrect.

Authoritarianism is about centralized imposed control.

So if an individual makes a choice =E2=80=94 say, filtering, blocking, or s=
etting=20
boundaries in a network =E2=80=94 that=E2=80=99s personal autonomy, not aut=
horitarianism.=20
They=E2=80=99re exercising their own agency, not asserting control over eve=
ryone=20
else.
On Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 4:47:07=E2=80=AFPM UTC-4 Greg Maxwell w=
rote:

> Because if you have a need to regulate traffic through your node there is=
=20
> one, simple, perfectly effective way-- blocksonly.  Any other way is=20
> ineffective (dramatically so if you wish to reduce traffic, as filtering=
=20
> generally doesn't) and has collateral damage potential.
>
> From the discussion in public the motivation to do otherwise is an attemp=
t=20
> to regulate the conduct of third parties. This is=20
> fundamentally authoritarian, it would still be authoritarian even if=20
> implemented in a distributed way.  E.g. if a theocratic populist movement=
=20
> acted to prohibit sex for any purpose except reproduction (as advocated b=
y=20
> the most prominent filter propents) such as by public stonings of people=
=20
> caught fornicating it would be just as authoritarian as if established by=
 a=20
> dictator.  In my view the fundamental nature of authoritarianism is peopl=
e=20
> who believe they know better to such an extent that they actively=20
> interfere with the consensual conduct of third parties.  Historically mos=
t=20
> authoritarianism has taken centralized forms, but this is partially just =
an=20
> implementation detail similar to how cultures have adopted representative=
=20
> democracy over direct democracy.  Centralized authoritarianism is itself=
=20
> normally via a group like a state government, but just one with restricte=
d=20
> membership.   Technology can enable distributed authoritarianism like the=
=20
> cancel culture of filter proponents.
>
> More importantly, I disagree that there is any meaningful democratization=
=20
> here-- to have any significant effects on the behavior of third parties,=
=20
> some external mechanism must coordinate the content of filters.  Were thi=
s=20
> not the case, you could simply say "my filtering node software exists and=
=20
> is available, problem solved!" -- but you're not doing that, because to=
=20
> have any effect (to the limited extent that you can) you essentially need=
=20
> to convince everyone or at least most people to apply the same restrictio=
ns.
>
> The fact that a mechanism isn't proposed here just obscures the matter=20
> because one will arise out of necessity (or, alternatively, the proposal=
=20
> would just not be used to a meaningful degree).  In essence the proposal=
=20
> (or ones like it like the one being developed in knots) are technological=
=20
> instruments of authoritarian censorship.  Sure they don't have all the=20
> components yet to complete their natural conclusion.
>
> > which is that the core maintainers decide all the defaults
>
> Defaults? well duh, yes any author of software decides its defaults and=
=20
> that is unchanged in this proposal.  Nor does it change persons own abili=
ty=20
> to change their node behavior, as adjustments to policy are quite simple=
=20
> and with the LLMs that power most filter advocates arguments even a=20
> non-programmer can adjust them.  What it does accomplish over that is the=
=20
> ability to take a live feed of censorship rules from a third party.
>
> Why doesn't core ship blocks only?  Core attempts to model what will get=
=20
> mined.  My blocks only recommendation was for parties that prioritize=20
> conserving resources or avoiding various unconfirmed traffic over=20
> accurately modeling what will get mined.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 7:16=E2=80=AFPM Chris Guida <chris...@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>
>> Hi Aiden -=20
>>
>> This is a very interesting proposal! It certainly has the potential to=
=20
>> reduce tension over mempool policy by removing decisions over mempool=20
>> policy from bitcoin core's maintainers, who, if I understand correctly, =
are=20
>> not very interested in being the arbiters of policy over the bitcoin=20
>> network anyway.
>>
>> This seems like an excellent way to let users decide which transactions=
=20
>> they will relay and which ones they won't, which core maintainers have n=
o=20
>> control over anyway.
>>
>> I'm cautiously optimistic that this proposal can help break the logjam.
>>
>> Greg -
>>
>> I'm somewhat confused as to your reaction here. This proposal=20
>> democratizes access to filter authorship; it does not seem in any way=20
>> "authoritarian" to me. On the contrary, this proposal seems less=20
>> "authoritarian" than the current state of affairs, which is that the cor=
e=20
>> maintainers decide all the defaults.
>>
>> >If you're not doing that you might as well set blocks only.
>>
>> Why is running blocksonly more beneficial than relaying some transaction=
s=20
>> and not others? Why does bitcoin core not default to blocksonly (or no=
=20
>> filters at all) if partial filtration is undesirable?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> --Chris Guida
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 12:47=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell <gmax...@gmail.com=
> wrote:
>>
>>> This appears to substantially misunderstands the purpose of the mempool=
=20
>>> broadly in the network-- it's purpose is to model what will get mined. =
 If=20
>>> you're not doing that you might as well set blocks only. =20
>>> Significant discrepancies are harmful to the system and promote=20
>>> centralization and fail to achieve a useful purpose in any case.  What=
=20
>>> marginal benefits might be provided do not justify building and deployi=
ng=20
>>> the technological infrastructure for massive censorship.
>>>
>>> If you think this is important, I advise you to select another=20
>>> cryptocurrency which is compatible with such authoritarian leanings.  -=
-=20
>>> though I am unsure if any exist since it is such a transparently pointl=
ess=20
>>> direction.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 6:30=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland <m...@drbonez.=
dev>=20
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to share for discussion a draft BIP to allow for a modular=20
>>>> mempool/relay policy: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1985
>>>>
>>>> I think it could potentially reduce conflict within the community=20
>>>> around relay policy, as an alternative to running lots of different no=
de=20
>>>> implementations/forks when there are disagreements.
>>>>
>>>> I am working on a reference implementation using Bellard's QuickJS, bu=
t=20
>>>> it has been almost a decade since I've written C++, so it's slow going=
 and=20
>>>> I'm sure doesn't follow best-practices. Once it's working, it can be=
=20
>>>> cleaned up.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Aiden McClelland
>>>>
>>>> --=20
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google=20
>>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send=
=20
>>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To view this discussion visit=20
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6=
c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com=20
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-=
6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> --=20
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google=20
>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send=
=20
>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion visit=20
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRFP%2BBJUZR7h01%3D7=
%3DqamD5qEW6OYJikTMR%3D5RkxTCEMZg%40mail.gmail.com=20
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRFP%2BBJUZR7h01%3D=
7%3DqamD5qEW6OYJikTMR%3D5RkxTCEMZg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_=
source=3Dfooter>
>>> .
>>>
>>

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/=
c26c2e30-3a74-4afa-b6b8-209c711b8167n%40googlegroups.com.

------=_Part_5365_1715934081.1758766838963
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I believe the proper framing of this situation is =E2=80=98distributed auto=
nomy=E2=80=99 not =E2=80=98distributed authoritarianism=E2=80=99 - which is=
 incredibly misleading and completely incorrect.<div><br /></div><div>Autho=
ritarianism is about centralized imposed control.</div><div><br /></div>So =
if an individual makes a choice =E2=80=94 say, filtering, blocking, or sett=
ing boundaries in a network =E2=80=94 that=E2=80=99s personal autonomy, not=
 authoritarianism. They=E2=80=99re exercising their own agency, not asserti=
ng control over everyone else.<br /><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"=
auto" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 4:47:07=E2=
=80=AFPM UTC-4 Greg Maxwell wrote:<br/></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin: 0 0 0 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204)=
; padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Because if you have a need to r=
egulate traffic through your node there is one, simple, perfectly effective=
 way-- blocksonly.=C2=A0 Any other way is ineffective (dramatically so if y=
ou wish to reduce traffic, as filtering generally doesn&#39;t) and has coll=
ateral damage potential.</div><div><br></div><div>From the discussion in pu=
blic the motivation to do otherwise is an attempt to regulate the conduct o=
f third parties. This is fundamentally=C2=A0authoritarian,=C2=A0it would st=
ill be authoritarian even if implemented in a distributed way.=C2=A0 E.g. i=
f a theocratic populist movement acted to prohibit sex for any purpose exce=
pt reproduction (as advocated by the most prominent=C2=A0filter propents) s=
uch as by public stonings of people caught fornicating it would be just as =
authoritarian as if established by a dictator.=C2=A0 In my view the fundame=
ntal=C2=A0nature of authoritarianism is people who believe they know better=
 to such an extent that they actively interfere=C2=A0with the consensual=C2=
=A0conduct of third parties.=C2=A0 Historically most authoritarianism=C2=A0=
has taken centralized forms, but this is partially just an implementation d=
etail similar to how cultures have adopted representative democracy over di=
rect democracy.=C2=A0 Centralized authoritarianism is itself normally via a=
 group like a state government, but just one with restricted membership.=C2=
=A0 =C2=A0Technology can enable=C2=A0distributed authoritarianism=C2=A0like=
 the cancel culture of filter proponents.</div><div><br></div><div>More imp=
ortantly, I disagree that there is any meaningful democratization here-- to=
 have any significant effects on the behavior of third parties, some extern=
al mechanism must coordinate the content of filters.=C2=A0 Were this not th=
e case, you could simply say &quot;my filtering node software exists and is=
 available, problem solved!&quot; -- but you&#39;re not doing that, because=
 to have any effect (to the limited extent that you can) you essentially ne=
ed to convince everyone or at least most people to apply the same restricti=
ons.</div><div><br></div><div>The fact that a mechanism isn&#39;t proposed =
here just obscures the matter because one will arise out of necessity (or, =
alternatively, the proposal would just not be used to a meaningful degree).=
=C2=A0 In essence the proposal (or ones like it like the one being develope=
d in knots) are technological instruments of authoritarian censorship.=C2=
=A0 Sure they don&#39;t have all the components yet to complete their natur=
al conclusion.</div></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div><div>&gt;=C2=A0wh=
ich is that the core maintainers decide all the defaults</div><div><br></di=
v></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Defaults? well duh, yes any author of softwar=
e decides its defaults and that is unchanged in this proposal.=C2=A0 Nor do=
es it change persons own ability to change their node behavior, as adjustme=
nts to policy are quite simple and with the LLMs that power most filter adv=
ocates arguments even a non-programmer can adjust them.=C2=A0 What it does =
accomplish over that is the ability to take a live feed of censorship rules=
 from a third party.</div><div><br></div><div>Why doesn&#39;t core ship blo=
cks only?=C2=A0 Core attempts to model what will get mined.=C2=A0 My blocks=
 only recommendation was for parties that prioritize conserving resources o=
r avoiding various unconfirmed traffic over accurately modeling=C2=A0what w=
ill get mined.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><=
/div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><di=
v dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 7:16=E2=80=AFPM =
Chris Guida &lt;<a href data-email-masked rel=3D"nofollow">chris...@gmail.c=
om</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex=
"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi Aiden - </div><div><br></div><div>This is a very=
 interesting proposal! It certainly has the potential to reduce tension ove=
r mempool policy by removing decisions over mempool policy from bitcoin cor=
e&#39;s maintainers, who, if I understand correctly, are not very intereste=
d in being the arbiters of policy over the bitcoin network anyway.</div><di=
v><br></div><div>This seems like an excellent way to let users decide which=
 transactions they will relay and which ones they won&#39;t, which core mai=
ntainers have no control over anyway.</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m caut=
iously optimistic that this proposal can help break the logjam.<br></div><d=
iv><br></div><div>Greg -</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m somewhat confused=
 as to your reaction here. This proposal democratizes access to filter auth=
orship; it does not seem in any way &quot;authoritarian&quot; to me. On the=
 contrary, this proposal seems less &quot;authoritarian&quot; than the curr=
ent state of affairs, which is that the core maintainers decide all the def=
aults.<br></div><div><br></div><div>&gt;If you&#39;re not doing that you mi=
ght as well set blocks only.</div><div><br></div><div>Why is running blocks=
only more beneficial than relaying some transactions and not others? Why do=
es bitcoin core not default to blocksonly (or no filters at all) if partial=
 filtration is undesirable?</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><di=
v><br></div><div>--Chris Guida<br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote=
"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 12:47=E2=80=
=AFPM Greg Maxwell &lt;<a href data-email-masked rel=3D"nofollow">gmax...@g=
mail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-le=
ft:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>This appears to substantially=C2=A0misunderst=
ands the purpose of the mempool broadly in the network-- it&#39;s purpose i=
s to model what will get mined.=C2=A0 If you&#39;re not doing that you migh=
t as well set blocks only.=C2=A0 Significant=C2=A0discrepancies=C2=A0are ha=
rmful to the system and promote centralization=C2=A0and fail to achieve a u=
seful purpose in any case.=C2=A0 What marginal benefits might be provided d=
o not justify=C2=A0building and deploying the technological=C2=A0infrastruc=
ture=C2=A0for massive censorship.</div><div><br></div><div>If you think thi=
s is important, I advise you to select another cryptocurrency which is comp=
atible with such authoritarian=C2=A0leanings.=C2=A0 -- though I am unsure i=
f any exist since it is such a transparently pointless direction.</div><div=
><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"g=
mail_attr">On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 6:30=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland &lt;<a =
href data-email-masked rel=3D"nofollow">m...@drbonez.dev</a>&gt; wrote:<br>=
</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;b=
order-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Hi all,</div><=
div><br></div><div>I&#39;d like to share for discussion a draft BIP to allo=
w for a modular mempool/relay policy: <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin=
/bips/pull/1985" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow" data-saferedirecturl=3D=
"https://www.google.com/url?hl=3Den&amp;q=3Dhttps://github.com/bitcoin/bips=
/pull/1985&amp;source=3Dgmail&amp;ust=3D1758851686260000&amp;usg=3DAOvVaw3w=
wzDt2_bb8Kd0oWYCxZ1m">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1985</a><br><br>=
</div><div>I think it could potentially reduce conflict within the communit=
y around relay policy, as an alternative to running lots of different node =
implementations/forks when there are disagreements.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>I am working on a reference implementation using Bellard&#39;s QuickJS, b=
ut it has been almost a decade since I&#39;ve written C++, so it&#39;s slow=
 going and I&#39;m sure doesn&#39;t follow best-practices. Once it&#39;s wo=
rking, it can be cleaned up.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Aid=
en McClelland<br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href data-email-masked rel=3D"nofollow">bitcoindev+...@googlegro=
ups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com?utm_med=
ium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow" dat=
a-saferedirecturl=3D"https://www.google.com/url?hl=3Den&amp;q=3Dhttps://gro=
ups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%254=
0googlegroups.com?utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&amp;source=3Dgma=
il&amp;ust=3D1758851686260000&amp;usg=3DAOvVaw1nPaXy-SBK_-ob2ECqliWw">https=
://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f5=
6n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href data-email-masked rel=3D"nofollow">bitcoindev+...@googlegro=
ups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRFP%2BBJUZR7h01%3D7%3DqamD5qEW6OYJikTMR%3D5RkxTCEMZg%40ma=
il.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" target=3D"_blank" =
rel=3D"nofollow" data-saferedirecturl=3D"https://www.google.com/url?hl=3Den=
&amp;q=3Dhttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRFP%252BBJUZR7=
h01%253D7%253DqamD5qEW6OYJikTMR%253D5RkxTCEMZg%2540mail.gmail.com?utm_mediu=
m%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&amp;source=3Dgmail&amp;ust=3D17588516862600=
00&amp;usg=3DAOvVaw3EwgdDyHiSvGFeMwtfcBbB">https://groups.google.com/d/msgi=
d/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRFP%2BBJUZR7h01%3D7%3DqamD5qEW6OYJikTMR%3D5RkxTCEMZg%40=
mail.gmail.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bitcoind=
ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/c26c2e30-3a74-4afa-b6b8-209c711b8167n%40googlegroups.com?utm_med=
ium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoind=
ev/c26c2e30-3a74-4afa-b6b8-209c711b8167n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />

------=_Part_5365_1715934081.1758766838963--

------=_Part_5364_589186089.1758766838963--