2
1
Genjix wrote about this in two recent posts. Here's one.
Some developers argue that with the issues being highly complex, that users have no say in the system’s core development
And the other:
Other developers disagree with giving this information away and feel like you as users should trust their judgement
Are there public expressions of some core developers that object to public scrutiny and participation in the decision-making process? Who, of the core team, has issued such opinions?
2
Some posts that genjix might have referred to:
Miners (as a group) should not be given any say over issues like this. They do not necessarily know what the best option is. The issue should be decided by people very familiar with the protocol and the proposals.
I suggest that we compile a list of everyone who knows a lot about the Bitcoin protocol, invite them to a two-week discussion via email, and have those who participate in the discussion vote on the issue at the end of the two weeks. If one proposal gets enough votes (two-thirds, say), then Bitcoin clients will be programmed to apply the new restrictions ~3 months in the future. Miners will have to upgrade by then or their blocks will not be recognized by most clients. If there aren't enough votes for any proposal to pass, the issue will be shelved for a while.
The bottom line is that non-technical people should have no say in an issue that is purely technical. This is technocratic democracy and it's simply the best way. All technical people should be invited to the discussion and then they can vote amongst themselves, simple as that. Then the results are made public and the miners will upgrade based on that, if the team decided to go forward with either BIP. There should of course be a vote for "neither".
3
You misunderstand what the developers are saying. They are not saying that they object to pubic scrutiny and participation. They are saying that being a user of Bitcoin does not somehow specially qualify you to comment on the design or implementation of the Bitcoin system.
Well, either way, I for one think that anyone can comment on whatever they want... Anyway, this better fits as a comment, because it doesn't really answer the question. – ripper234 – 2012-01-31T08:42:55.047
3It answers the question -- nobody on the core team has said they object to public scrutiny and participation. And yes, anyone can comment on whatever they want, no developer has said that "mere users" should be prohibited from commenting. They just find that it's generally a waste of time to read the comments. Good comments will percolate up by themselves into coherent proposals. – David Schwartz – 2012-01-31T08:44:50.403
The rephrase the question - who does @genjix refer to in his multiple quotes? Another quote:
– ripper234 – 2012-01-31T08:49:22.353Other developers disagree with giving this information away and feel like you as users should trust their judgementhttp://bitcoinmedia.com/the-truth-behind-bip-16-and-17/He only says "some developers" or "other developers". But he may be referring to the fact that miners vote on the P2SH proposal. Why don't you ask him what he means? Anyone else would have to guess. – David Schwartz – 2012-01-31T08:58:01.980
I suspect that genjix might be deliberately trying not to name them in order "not to bad mouth specific people", which I understand. However, if his posts and comments are based on something that is public knowledge (forum posts, emails in the dev group), then someone else could point out what this is based on. The reason I think it's important is because IMO every public opinion made by various "important bitcoin people" testifies to the character of those people, and absolute transparency is essential. – ripper234 – 2012-01-31T09:46:41.260
Bitcoin is based on trust ... not everone reads every commits or every forum post. People support or object to proposals (e.g. BIP 16/17, and others) based not only on the content of the proposals, but also on the character of the proposers. Consider for example SolidCoin - I was quite interested in it until I saw a log of an IRC chat between Gavin & CoinHunter, where CoinHunter showed absolute disrespect and lack of "seriousness". So even without understanding all the protocol details, I can predict that SolidCoin won't take off simply because of its champions. – ripper234 – 2012-01-31T09:48:44.503
1To conclude this rant - I simply think that facts are important, and should be public, including opinions that person X or Y publicly made about topic Z. – ripper234 – 2012-01-31T09:50:40.910