I'm playing with Knots, but it's more important to understand the argument first.
I'm not trying to win the Knots argument, I'm trying to understand the Core position.
Discussion
The argument is they do what they want now and close debate when questioned.
Yes, 100%, this is the problem.
This is the bit I don't like or respect.
This article does a great job laying out the current OP_RETURN policy debate, IMO. https://antoinep.com/posts/relay_policy_drama/
Yes, that was the article I was referring to in the previous note with Will π
Yes, for me personally, when it was clear there was not consensus, it should have been asked for community view and input. Also, can they clearly confirm this question?
Core is a software project with a long history, started by Satoshi and Martti and maintained by many contributors over the years. It doesnβt represent a single viewpoint β even experienced developers like sipa have changed their minds on this issue.
Coreβs track record has been strong: conservative, stable, and cautious by design. That doesn't mean it's above criticism, or that every maintainer gets everything right. But attacking "Core" as a whole over individual judgment calls is too broad.
Itβs more productive to engage with specific issues or arguments raised by individuals, and see if theyβre open to feedback. Core as a whole is good, even if no single developer or group gets every call right every time. Thatβs why it matters that the broader community makes its voice heard.
So far, the core team have not been open to engage or open to feedback on this matter.
This is an own goal for the core team, which I hope they will reverse.
Talk to us, we will listen, without prejudice.