The non sequitur is relating the dev to feds when the code is all that matters. That was the original deflection. Following the path of deflection was still nonsense because there is the same argument for both.

I don't follow the point you are making. Changes equals bad because ???? If those changes are the removal of choice then sure but they aren't so, what are you trying to say? Also, I responded to this post as well, so you can read that as well.

You can run an old version of core with the choice still available to you. All implementations of core are backwards compatable. It seems safer than running something different with all sorts of potentially problematic changes and while declaring it does not matter that the individual advocating this drastic measure no longer has a financial motive for bitcoins success, a big old axe to grind and has opened a communication channel with the feds. But that's just my opinion the choice is yours. Also it raises red flags when people say a project, that is working perfectly fine, is completely doomed unless I alone am allowed to fix it. And when pressed for specific answers I get rambling deflections. In other words knots has been saying Bitcoin is doomed unless we all switch to knots but when pressed for specifics on how Bitcoin will fail the argument falls flat. imho. Footage of knots saving bitcoing

I don't say those things so, maybe just address concerns that I put forward. I would be a fan of Libbitcoin, if it actually worked (it doesn't). The point is all of the "changes" Luke makes are also toggles or fields that give users choice. I don't care if luke is a federal agent's prostitute if the code he writes gives me choice and it's open for audit. So, continually bringing up feds, spam prevention, and lost bitcoin is immaterial to the actual discussion. I DON'T CARE. The discussion is one group just updated the swiss army knife with 3 less screwdrivers and a different group added 5 more. I like more options not less. That's it.

My concern is that the toggle fields/choices are a distraction. And the real changes are under the radar so yes it matters the character as well as the motivations of those who write them. The old saying "sometimes the cure is worse than the disease" comes to mind. This is Bitcoin, there are no regulators we are on our own and I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet based on what I know. Don't trust verify right? And from what my limited understanding tells me knots is selling their users a bill of goods.

Dude, just read the code. Tell me where Luke put the "GET EM FEDS!" variable. If he did, I would be right there with you. But I haven't found it and neither have you (or else you'd be citing code lines instead of making moralistic or equivocation arguments).