Bitcoin Forum

Here's a link to the podcast:
http://www.bitcoin.kn/2015/09/adam-back-gavin-andresen-block-size-increase/?utm_campaign=dr-adam-back-and-gavin-andresen-discuss-a-block-size-increase&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter

Did Satoshi trick Gavin, or did Gavin trick Satoshi? ...... Theymos did not slip up, when he started to ban XT shills on \r\Bitcoin. He just prevented a small percentage of people

from brigading and forcing people to use a lesser fork. It was just a temporary ban in anyway, so I guess some people got the message and things returned to normal quickly.

I hope some of Dr Adam Back's wisdow will rub off on Gavin and he could break away from Hearn's influence. Gavin have so much more to offer...  ;)

This podcast certainly makes me feel optimistic that a solution will be found.  For all the posts currently flooding onto the forum portraying Adam and Gavin as polar opposites with no common ground, it's clear from this discussion that such views are false and manipulative.  They can still have cordial and civilised discourse and both clearly agree larger blocks are required.  The only issue remaining is finding the right balance.

Yah... if Adam Back, the president of blockstream, can persuade Gavin to join blockstream, you can be sure that it is end game.

Very nice conversation!
I mean, the number 8 is staring at us in the picture right there (http://www.bitcoin.kn/) :)

If we recollect the fact that one of the main principles of the Universe is self-similarity
and understand what the situation we are currently facing here is analogous to,
we will quickly realize that the process is often spontaneous and fairly Chaotic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XlzlVGFufY).

So, we better have our full nodes patched & ready! :)

Lol at Gavin suddenly behaving like Mr. Consensus: "we at Core" "maybe Adam's right" etc.

But it's good that he's adjusted from the "XT, ransom-demand-as-a-proposal" antics. If we're playing in the arena of ideas again, which involves discussion, not unilateralism, then we will see whether the arguments of the BIP101 camp can stand up.

Good conversation and glad things are being civil. You so often lose that sort of context when looking at written forms such as forums.

I felt that they were both arguing for the right reasons, but had different views of what centralisation meant. I resonated very strongly with Dr Adam Backs concerns about corporate mining and datacenters being in the future (as a bad thing) which is a top-down systems view. Gavin seemed to relate that to the block size which was a kind of tenuous bottom-up view but understandable from being in the battle scarred trenches.

However, one was a systemic view of centralisation with the hindsight of the current network systems and the trends in high frequency trading, while the other was a technical possibility of a way that a specific form of centralisation might be obtained IF the block size pushes people off the network. While the latter is obviously the point behind the podcast if not that particular point in the discussion, it did open my eyes to where the possible divisions lie.

I couldn't shake the sense that they were arguing from different ends of the same problem and couldn't agree on where the middle was.

I think Hearn is the most controversial figure and not Gavin, Gavin seems more reasonable but he has had some pretty dodgy behavior as well (look for the logs of some irc chats). I think Carlton Banks (not the Belair prince brother I mean the poster above) might be onto something. Gavin is seeing that XT has at this point pretty much failed to gain any relevant traction, which translates into basically backpedaling.

What about the part where Gavin claims the Bitcoin community has delivered it's judgement on the Core developers, and that to reflect that, they should be sacked? Civil?

You don't achieve consensus by banning people.

Sometime there is no civil way to tell the harsh truth.

Gavin knows that he lost the power game. Now he desperately tries to remain relevant. Adam and most other Core developers clearly have the more convincing arguments. The smear tactics used against Blockstream won't change that. I trust them more than a guy who accepted an invitation to the CIA and uses his publicity to aggressively push a half-baked idea.

I like the part where Gavin says the block limit can completely removed and we'll probably be fine.  ;D

Theymos banned them because at that time XT was considered alt-strain of Bitcoin and not 'true' Bitcoin.
And people were discussing it in the bitcoin section of reddit, that is the only reason I believe.
But you are right, I too think it was slight overreaction from Theymos side, you can discuss things and  ban people at the same time.