techfeudalist on Nostr: You say it “appears to be safe”, but have put forward no justification to support ...

You say it “appears to be safe”, but have put forward no justification to support that statement. You can’t say just say “trust me” to the bitcoin community. We need the “verify” part too.


“it’s *easier* to justify than a bunch of things we’ve already soft forked for.”

Sure, but you and I both know that’s not a real argument. Arguing that devs were more reckless in the past doesn’t justify additional reckless protocol changes. That past recklessness explains why we have the witness discount, more spam data in our timechain, and additional centralizing forces on miners.

Bottom line: if you’re advocating to change the core protocol, you have an obligation to demonstrate that it’s safe and necessary. You owe the community this. And since you have a highly visible platform, you have a duty to use a higher standard of care … a higher bar, if you will.