The true problem regarding Discourse in the Bitcoin Community

[DiamondCardz]

This thread is going to be unbiased. It's going to talk about both sides of the coin, and it won't mention my personal beliefs on what client (Core/XT) we should support.

The problem that stops discourse from happening in the Bitcoin community isn't actually the fact that there are separate clients/protocols being developed. That's not the problem. The problem is that everyone (rather, most people - but this isn't limited to a single group, or Core supporters, or XT supporters) has a simple mentality:

"It's us vs. them."

No. It's not. The whole idea of Bitcoin is that it is designed to unite people globally and break us free of the chains of a centralized government or banking system. The moment anyone, no matter what they support, adopts an "us vs. them" mentality, this starts to break down. Once that happens, we're no longer united as one. Unfortunately, this has been happening more and more often and it needs to stop. Discourse cannot effectively take place in a stage where there are barriers to this discourse.

I had that mentality until very recently, too. It's hard to notice and get rid of, but once you do get rid of it, everything seems a lot better in the community. That mentality is the whole reason there seems to be a ridiculous kind of "war" between the different types of clients, and if you take away that mentality, this "war" quickly dissolves into it's component parts of "a good debate about whether we should use BIPxxx or BIPyyy, whether we should use client x or client y" and "heated disagreement". Once it is dissolved into those component parts, you can simply choose to ignore the "heated disagreement" and only listen to the discourse/debating.

I don't think anyone wants this arguing. I don't think @rogerver or [any well-known person in the Bitcoin community] really wants to see this happening, either. And why would anyone? What is the point of such a large, amazing, trustless currency if we do not even trust each other?

That might not make sense the first time you read it, as a trustless currency means we don't need to trust each other. But if we don't trust each other over the Bitcoin protocol, it cannot properly function as a trustless currency - for people to be able to use a trustless currency, they need to have faith in the protocol backing it!

That's just something to think about. We should be collaborating, not arguing about what client to use.

[rogerver]

I think most of the time, most of the people, want the same sort of things.
The problems arise because people see many different ways to achieve those same goals.
Small blockists claim that big blocks will lead to more centralization.
Big blockists think that continuing with small blocks will lead to more centralization.

It's hard to know which is right, or what actions should be taken.

I found Jeff Garzik's comment that we must increase the block size limit in order to keep bitcoin the same, especially interesting.

I also found this talk especially compelling in this debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad0Pjj_ms2k

[DiamondCardz]

I think most of the time, most of the people, want the same sort of things.
The problems arise because people see many different ways to achieve those same goals.
Small blockists claim that big blocks will lead to more centralization.
Big blockists think that continuing with small blocks will lead to more centralization.

Indeed, though I think the vast majority of people are agreeing on an increase in the block limit now, they just disagree on what the magnitude of the increase should be. Which of all the things to disagree on...is really a rather petty issue.

That was a great video, also. Good to see some actual economics and D/S curve diagrams rather than just bickering.

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

This thread is going to be unbiased. It's going to talk about both sides of the coin, and it won't mention my personal beliefs on what client (Core/XT) we should support.

The problem that stops discourse from happening in the Bitcoin community isn't actually the fact that there are separate clients/protocols being developed. That's not the problem. The problem is that everyone (rather, most people - but this isn't limited to a single group, or Core supporters, or XT supporters) has a simple mentality:

"It's us vs. them."

No. It's not. The whole idea of Bitcoin is that it is designed to unite people globally and break us free of the chains of a centralized government or banking system. The moment anyone, no matter what they support, adopts an "us vs. them" mentality, this starts to break down. Once that happens, we're no longer united as one. Unfortunately, this has been happening more and more often and it needs to stop. Discourse cannot effectively take place in a stage where there are barriers to this discourse.

I had that mentality until very recently, too. It's hard to notice and get rid of, but once you do get rid of it, everything seems a lot better in the community. That mentality is the whole reason there seems to be a ridiculous kind of "war" between the different types of clients, and if you take away that mentality, this "war" quickly dissolves into it's component parts of "a good debate about whether we should use BIPxxx or BIPyyy, whether we should use client x or client y" and "heated disagreement". Once it is dissolved into those component parts, you can simply choose to ignore the "heated disagreement" and only listen to the discourse/debating.

I don't think anyone wants this arguing. I don't think @rogerver or [any well-known person in the Bitcoin community] really wants to see this happening, either. And why would anyone? What is the point of such a large, amazing, trustless currency if we do not even trust each other?

That might not make sense the first time you read it, as a trustless currency means we don't need to trust each other. But if we don't trust each other over the Bitcoin protocol, it cannot properly function as a trustless currency - for people to be able to use a trustless currency, they need to have faith in the protocol backing it!

That's just something to think about. We should be collaborating, not arguing about what client to use.

In a perfect world, "No-Ego Bitcoin" aha

[DiamondCardz]

In a perfect world, "No-Ego Bitcoin" aha

Well, that is how it should be. If we let ego and emotion get in the way of civilised debate and figuring out what is best for the Bitcoin protocol, we're unlikely to actually get anywhere.

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

In a perfect world, "No-Ego Bitcoin" aha

Well, that is how it should be. If we let ego and emotion get in the way of civilised debate and figuring out what is best for the Bitcoin protocol, we're unlikely to actually get anywhere.

Agreed, setting a good example is key. Ignore the ego maniacs, keep moving forward and voila. The good will always out-weigh the bad, regardless of the circumstance.