Good to hear this, and thanks for sharing the video from Vinay Gupta. I suddenly understand lots of thing in the latest HongKong consensus conference. Why Gavin was not there, why Pieter was rush to push in a strange soft fork proposal and why Jeff said you should not be afraid of hard fork. It seems there are still very strong political struggle inside

Although I do not run XT due to my personal perference (I'm the conservative type that prefer change nothing unless definitely necessary), but it is good to hear different voice since bitcoin should be politically neutral, not presenting any single faction's interest

However, any decision will make you either tilt to one side or the other, you can not really be 100% neutral. And because participants all have different interest, it is very difficult to reach agreement in a decentralized community

Typically in a open source project, people with the most knowledge get to decide what code should go in, what should not, this kind of governance structure has been existing since GIT was born. So from a political point of view, the governance structure is very centralized and hierachical. Then if we have two lead designer do not agree with each other, we have this XT branch, similar to a civil war in a centrally organized country

I think eventually there is a need for some kind of code like ten commandments in Bible, although you don't need government in anarchist community, but you still need some kind of basic principles to guide everyone. But so far I have only seen Nick Szabo mentioned a little about 4 priorities, and that also need completion/debate