Replying to Avatar Vortex | CTV | LNHANCE

Really happy with how this page is turning out.

A couple of observations so far:

-CTV has more clear technical consensus than any other op_code

-CAT has just slightly less consensus than CTV

-APO has the least technical consensus after CCV and PC.

-CCV still needs alot of evaluating

Thanks to all the developers who've voiced their opinion, we're getting new ones every day!

If you haven't gotten a chance yet make sure to do so by clicking the link below:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Covenants_support

Avatar
podl 1y ago

So:

Evaluating = maybe

No = maybe (on the original post - updated to 'no' in the linked document)

Deficient = ok

Weak = pretty good

Wanting = would be nice

Acceptable = do it

Prefer = cowabunga!

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Vortex | CTV | LNHANCE 1y ago

Yah I mean the table is on the website

Avatar
podl 1y ago

OK. So:

- maybe

-no

-yes

-yes

-yes

-yes

-yes

Not just trolling here. Just doesn't seem objective. Nor has the discussion about covenants all along IMO.

Obviously people aren't objective in their opinions about something so significant as the future of Bitcoin. But I think it's a big part of why it hasn't gained the traction people think it should

Avatar
podl 1y ago

Maybe something like:

"On a scale of 1-10, how worried are you about unintended consequences?"

Avatar
Vortex | CTV | LNHANCE 1y ago

Any worry about unintended consequences is implied in the options available, for example if one was actually worried at all then they would simply put No.