BitcoinTalk, your bias is showing.

[PepeLapiu2]

Until a couple weeks ago, there was at the top of this forum a thread announcing the release of Core 29.
Everyone was free to reply to it, ask questions, make suggestions, make a comment.

Amongst the many replies, one of them asked why BitcoinTalk only posts a Core 29 announcement but not a Knots 29 anouncement. It was brushed off by saying Core is the more popular one right now, so they only announce Core. Fair enough.

I guess we are ignoring the fact that the number of nodes have been increasing a lot lately, and they appear to mostly be new Knots nodes. I guess we are also ignoring the fact that there is a massive migration from dick pic loving core to Knots. But fair enough.

But than I also noticed a few people complaining about Core and their pro-spam and pro-dick pic policies. I also voiced my concerns too.

Someone (maybe an admin or the OP?) started to get aggravated and said they won't allow certain comments in the thread. Now I can see how dick pic loving core would not want to hear too much criticizism about what they are doing. But why does BitcoinTalk care so much about criticism of Core?

Than Core 30 came around and it was also announced here. You can see that thread here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562097.0

Of course that thread soon ended up getting filled with complaints about core's pro-spam pro dick pic policy. Core still doesn't want to hear about the concerns of the nodes. So that thread was not pinned at the top of the forum. Instead a new thread was posted at the top of the forum and comments were disabled.

It's a lot easier for dick pic loving core devs to keep doing what they do when they can ignore dissent. But for the life of me, I can't understand why BitcoinTalk is siding with Core, still refusing to announce the Knots releases, an locking out comments so that fewer people will see the concerns of the nodes.

Asking for a friend: Does Core donate to BitcoinTalk? Do any shitcoin companies donate to BitcoinTalk?


.

[PostQuantumBTC]

You are not saying what is true, some people first commented bad about it but some people supported it Bitcoin Core 30.

This will be the third time that I will say this, that I can not support something that is very centralized like Bitcoin Knot that is maintained by just a single person, Bitcoin Core has many developers.

Have you forgotten that Satoshi Nakamoto, who created bitcoin and this forum also created Bitcoin Core?

Bitcoin Knot can create their own forum or dialogue with theymos. Bitcoin Knot developer is also free to post about this updates on a thread on the right board on this forum.

[Zoomic]

Do you realize that the the Core 30 announcement you referred to, where you have exhausted this discussion with likes of Gmaxwell was created by a forum user like you and not by the forum or its representative?

Than Core 30 came around and it was also announced here. You can see that thread here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562097.0

Can you mention any suspected shitcoin that is being promoted by the forum?

Asking for a friend: Does Core donate to BitcoinTalk? Do any shitcoin companies donate to BitcoinTalk?

[theymos]

Yes, I am "biased" toward the software project which Satoshi started, which is now maintained by Bitcoin's most dedicated champions and the crypto industry's most skilled experts.

I'm not going to recommend Knots to people. It's not nearly as well-reviewed, and Luke is a bit unhinged, so I don't think that it's a good idea to run it in important contexts. Also, the way that Knots "resists" big-data transactions is ineffective and bound to fail, so portraying this as some kind of "vote" would be misleading. If there was a serious movement toward a softfork which would ban big-data transactions starting in eg. 18 months, then that'd at least have some chance of success, so maybe I'd put some "both sides" note in the news-bar in that case.

So that thread was not pinned at the top of the forum. Instead a new thread was posted at the top of the forum and comments were disabled.

achow101 always posts an "official" announcement thread in a particular format, and that's the one which gets stickied. Neither the old topic nor the new topic are locked.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

OP I think you are being a bit too radical and this definitely is not good for the Bitcoin community. Imagine already labelling core as a malware just because it hasn't yet adopted what you want it to have?

Why the rush, though?

The migration if there is any should be organic. Not something just forced and dictated in a haste manner, and that is what decentralization is all about.

[_act_]

OP I think you are being a bit too radical and this definitely is not good for the Bitcoin community. Imagine already labelling core as a malware just because it hasn't yet adopted what you want it to have?

Why the rush, though?

The migration if there is any should be organic. Not something just forced and dictated in a haste manner, and that is what decentralization is all about.

There is even no rush in this, he can run Bitcoin Knot if he wants. He can also create threads about Bitcoin Knot if he wants. He should not start to create topics like this which is not useful for us on this forum. He can post what he wants on the Bitcoin Core thread to let people know his mind and no need to start another drama on this forum regarding Core and Knot.

[Ambatman]

I don't recall the forum having any policy against sharing knot updates.
You can choose to do so yourself
Just like achow does.
You can start with something you can control like sharing it as a thread
Before focusing on something we can't. Convincing the forum to.

I guess we are ignoring the fact that the number of nodes have been increasing a lot lately, and they appear to mostly be new Knots nodes. I guess we are also ignoring the fact that there is a massive migration from dick pic loving core to Knots. But fair enough.

Knot is around 21% of total nodes. So the excuse that core is more popular still stands.

BitcoinTalk, your bias is showing.

As long as humans exist there would always be bias.
Just like you biased against core because you prefer censorship.

Ironically I'm biased against spam too but I try to understand why core did what they did
And what knots censorship signifies. Permissionless.

[Pablo-wood]

...

I will simply ask  would there even be Knots without Core? If Core is being prioritized on the forum, it doesn't mean Knots can't be discussed. After all, Knots is built on Core, and both contribute in their own ways to Bitcoin's development. I also don't think many casual users are aware of Bitcoin Knots, probably because it's more advanced and geared toward experienced users.

[PostQuantumBTC]

I will simply ask  would there even be Knots without Core? If Core is being prioritized on the forum, it doesn’t mean Knots can’t be discussed. After all, Knots is built on Core, and both contribute in their own ways to Bitcoin’s development. I also don’t think many casual users are aware of Bitcoin Knots, probably because it’s more advanced and geared toward experienced users.

Knot give more features but not advancement to me. Anyone that is able to run Core will be able to run Knot. But Knot is very centralized, I prefer Core.

[Pmalek]

The thread you linked to in your OP (this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562097.0) was created by a regular forum user, announcing that the new version of Bitcoin Core is out. It's got nothing to do with the forum's staff. They didn't create it. You are free to contribute to it in any way you want as long as you respect the forum's rules.
The sticky thread in Bitcoin Discussion was created by a Bitcoin Core contributor and Bitcointalk moderator, achow101. It makes sense to have it as a sticky topic at the top in that board regardless if you don't like that particular software. Why would a Bitcoin Core developer open a thread about Bitcoin Knotz and make that a sticky thread? There are other less-known full node implementations as well and those aren't sticky either, are they?

Additionally, nothing is stopping you to create your own threads about Bitcoin Knotz if you so please. Again, you must respect the forum rules when doing so.

[NotATether]

Historically the forum has always placed the link to the latest Core version on the bulletin section. It's not bias.

Although they (not theymos obviously) would probably welcome a debate on whether to include a Knots release section. IMO it's only relevant because nobody edits the Wiki anymore, otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[OgNasty]

While there is likely some truth to the claim that Bitcointalk is biased towards Core, I think Knots is probably a bit young to be actively promoted in the same way. I realize the issue is bigger than that and with people like Nick Szabo coming out in favor of running Knots as a way to fight spam on the blockchain, I think it will continue growing and maybe in the future could replace Core as being the most popular Bitcoin wallet software.

[PepeLapiu2]

The migration if there is any should be organic. Not something just forced and dictated in a haste manner, and that is what decentralization is all about.

Did you step on a Lego when you got up this morning?

Nobody is rushing anyone or putting a gun to anyone's head to switch away from dick pic loving core and into Knots.
A good share of the Knots nodes are new nodes put online by bitcoiners who got very worried about core's desire to blow up op_return to 100,000 bytes when absolutely nobody was asking for that.

My advise to you is follow the money. But that's a bit hard to do because the list of core donators has been scrubbed off the internet.

But that list getting scrubbed off the internet, it's probably caused by the Knots filters censoring everything that doesn't have a Swastika on it....right?

Anyways, this thread was moved against my will to a section where a lot less people will see it. So I'm not going to reply here anymore.
BitcoinRalk censorship methods worked...again.

[_act_]

Anyways, this thread was moved against my will to a section where a lot less people will see it. So I'm not going to reply here anymore.
BitcoinRalk censorship methods worked...again.

You posted this topic on Meta and the thread is still on Meta board, so what are you implying? Or you thought people will support you but they did not support you.

[PepeLapiu2]

You posted this topic on Meta and the thread is still on Meta board, so what are you implying? Or you thought people will support you but they did not support you.

Nope. I did not post any of my threads on Meta. In fact I didn't even know that this section of the forum existed before my thread was moved here.

My OP was posted on Bitcoin Discussion and moved here without my consent, without any notification or justification.

Anyways. I'm not going to keep talking to the wall in the 3rd basement of the BitcoinTalk office. I'm done with this thread. Watch out for cockroaches and rats aroud here.

[TryNinja]

Anyways, this thread was moved against my will to a section where a lot less people will see it. So I'm not going to reply here anymore.
BitcoinRalk censorship methods worked...again.

Wow, such censorship by moving a topic that talks about bitcointalk to the board where people are supposed to talk about bitcointalk.

meta /mĕt′ə/
adjective
Making or showing awareness of reference to oneself or to the activity that is taking place, especially in an ironic or comic way.
Self-referential; at a higher level.

FYI, there are so many repetitive posts on the Bitcoin Discussion board that you'll probably get more eyes and serious replies on this board. You should thank the mod who made the move.

[Pmalek]

Nope. I did not post any of my threads on Meta. In fact I didn't even know that this section of the forum existed before my thread was moved here.

My OP was posted on Bitcoin Discussion and moved here without my consent, without any notification or justification.

The mods did have a justification. Your topic is forum-related. It's about Bitcointalk and the bias you think the staff of Bitcointalk has. The right place for that is Meta. You are not discussing Bitcoin full node clients, their features, and pros and cons. If you created a thread about that and posted it on Meta, then the mods would again be right to move it from Meta to a board more suitable for Bitcoin and Bitcoin-client related discussions.

[ABCbits]

Nope. I did not post any of my threads on Meta. In fact I didn't even know that this section of the forum existed before my thread was moved here.

My OP was posted on Bitcoin Discussion and moved here without my consent, without any notification or justification.

The mods did have a justification. Your topic is forum-related. It's about Bitcointalk and the bias you think the staff of Bitcointalk has. The right place for that is Meta. You are not discussing Bitcoin full node clients, their features, and pros and cons. If you created a thread about that and posted it on Meta, then the mods would again be right to move it from Meta to a board more suitable for Bitcoin and Bitcoin-client related discussions.

You expect too much from someone who doesn't seem to read forum rule. He regularly violate forum rule by creating multiple posts in a row. Here's an example, https://ninjastic.space/topic/5562097. "PepeLapiu" and "PepeLapiu2" probably owned by same people.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Did you step on a Lego when you got up this morning?

if it bruised your radicalized ego, then yes, I did.

Nobody is rushing anyone or putting a gun to anyone's head to switch away from dick pic loving core and into Knots.

Then quit grumbling about it and let the process take its course. You think you are the only one who hates a mess on the Bitcoin network?

Anyways, this thread was moved against my will to a section where a lot less people will see it. So I'm not going to reply here anymore.
BitcoinRalk censorship methods worked...again.

You are complaining about the forum. Where do you expect the thread to be?
And if you really think moving the thread to the right board is censorship, then I really wonder how old you are. Self-entitled teenager?

[Cryptohygenic]

You don't have to talk that wild like you just cut of from the chain.
From what I know as an obligation of the regulating bitcointalk talk community, users are bound limited to speech levels that would not be abusive or misleading.
For the forum to keep sacrosanct, threads has to be moderated against irrelevant and other potential violence threat's including Ads.
Spamming is also what warrants admins or moderators take decisions on threads. I will also advise you zip up to cope with the forum and it approach between the Cores and the Nodes as traditionally the forum is focused on the ethics of promoting safety and fair services which is every individuals concern.