Author: Jeremy Rubin 2022-05-02 03:16:58
Published on: 2022-05-02T03:16:58+00:00
The context is a message from Jeremy Rubin, in which he offers an explanation of his actions and response to the Bitcoin community's reaction. He posted a blog post encouraging review on the viability of having a Speedy Trial (ST) with signaling beginning around 3.5 weeks, followed by a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss the viability of an activation attempt. If ST was deemed viable, he provided a pathway for sufficient review to occur and 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." If ST was not viable, he gave encouragement to more thoroughly "re-evaluate the design of CTV against alternatives that would take more time to prepare engineering-wise." He made it clear that CTV activation was "not a must," and all actors must decide if it's in their own rational self-interest to have the soft-fork proceed. He provided a review of rationale for why he thought this to be the right next step for CTV and for future soft forks to follow.Since he posted his blog, there have been inaccurate claims made about him trying to route around consensus, force miners to do a ST, force users to accept a patch they don't want, calls for him to face various repercussions, attacks on his character, and more. Anyone is free to read the material he actually communicated himself and evaluate the claims of bad faith being made. He accepts responsibility that ultimately he may not have communicated these things clearly enough.He has kept his word to listen to feedback on parameters before any release. He has not released binaries for a ST CTV client in May and won't be. He has kept his promise not to run a UASF process. He hopes people can believe him that he is not trying to do anything wanton to Bitcoin. He is trying to do his best to accurately communicate his exact intentions and plans along the way and learn from the ways he fell short.He thanks the majority of individuals who understand this and have provided overwhelming amounts of personal support to him through these last weeks. While he does not mistake that personal support for support of his views, he wanted to share the depth of support and appreciation that the community has for the difficult tasks developers engage in. 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 him 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, he encourages them to trace how the response to his proposal was instigated so that they harden their own defenses against such disinformation campaigns in the future. He encourages people to look closely at what various "respected members of the community" have lobbied for because they represent dangerous precedents for all Bitcoin developers. He has yet to fully form his thoughts around this.He invites anyone who does not think that his actions lived up with his perception of them to give him, either publicly or privately, any feedback on how he can do better going forward. With respect to this thread, he'll read whatever you send, but he won't be reply-all'ing here as he views this as largely off-topic for this list, unless anyone feels strongly otherwise.
Updated on: 2023-05-22T19:55:21.353282+00:00