People say the same thing about Linus, but the core people have guided Bitcoin to this point just as Linus has remained the benevolent dictator of Linux. “Social consensus” is basically you saying that code decisions should be made based on the number of people on subreddits you can get agreeing with you. This is not how sane development processes work. I’ve heard this kind of rhetoric before from Bcashers. They relentlessly said this shit for years to demand Core people implement suicidal policies that would have destroyed the decentralized nature of #Bitcoin. Bcashers also attempted to hijack control of the Bitcoin network by convincing people that they could “vote” by controlling more nodes (wrong, Bitcoin is defined by what chain has done the most proof of work). So the way #knots is operating is both rhetorically *and* operationally familiar.
#core developers, much like Linus, dealt enough with people offering “helpful suggestions”, absolutely moronic or intentionally malicious and subversive code submissions, and the armies of commenters thinking they know better than the people who have been around since the beginning. Back in the days of Bcash, they for a long time showed endless patience carefully explaining hunderds of times their decision making process. Eventually they tired of it and adopted the current and correct attitude towards people who think they know better.
