Wow, that was absolutely brilliant!
Yes, it was a great example of two opposing opinions being debated and argued in a professional, competent and respectful manner.
Additionally, it is a good example of why Jon Matonis should be included in the Press Center (
as discussed in this thread) if the goal the goal of this Press Center should be to make the press's job easier and the standard used for inclusion should be competence and professionalism along with established reputations in the Bitcoin community. I do not see why political ideology is relevant or should be used for any type of test or standard for inclusion. This interview is a good example of where using political ideology as a test or standard for inclusion will be a disservice to the journalists who visit this page seeking guests or commentators for pieces they are writing or segments they are producing.
For those unaware, verification of the positions of three long-standing developers, jgarzik, gmaxwell and LukeJR, regarding the need for a political ideology test for inclusion as a Potential Interviewee is easily found with clear and succinct statements found
here:
LukeJR: "NACK putting extremist anarchists (at least Matonis) as press contacts..."
jgarzik: "Well, even though some of his Forbes pieces I agree with, Matonis goes too far in openly advocating illegal behavior like tax evasion. Roger Ver used to give interviews to places like the Daily Anarchist, though I think some of that is toned down now."
gmaxwell: "While I am delighted that Bitcoin is a big enough tent to include such diversity, I think the names we extend as press contacts should be tend to be politically moderate."
