@mike started chatting about it having stopped recording on our episode Feels a very important topic to get across

This is my take: nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqyv8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcprfmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem9w3skccne9e3k7mf0wccsqgra6vnf7sc33vj356ak75430ungrulrndajawp3g45y6ndzyu6hwch652na

The OP_RETURN war of 2025 View quoted note →

One guest speaker is not going to help. We the audience need a proper moderated debate. And what Bitcoin nodes need are a testing ground where trial and error happens. All this what-if's and predicting unintended consequences reeks of central planning, whether it's for Knots or for Core changes. The reality is both options have opportunity costs.

Bitcoin Mechanic

A moderated debate would be very helpful I agree. Would you be willing to join one? Anyone that runs a node or is a user has a very valid opinion

Yes sounds an important person to track down

I’m interested in seeing it.

I have someone much better for you on this particular subject. Will DM you.

Of course @Bitcoin Mechanic But You should also have Arman the Parman

@npub1ltt9...k97y any chance I can get an hour of your time for a podcast? (I know having asked before it's unlikely, but figured worth a try!)

For this cast, while this tech/philosophy lens is active, consider dragging it over to other areas in the codebase roadmad where there may be dissenting purposes. This debate flareup has caused many to learn about their helm and to take up their rudder. We are all Satoshi, right? We each have a responsibility as self-sovereign. Pointing the dialogue to other things where there should be a call for our attention and purpose behind our configs could be very helpful.