My current thought is Dan and Stan prioritize getting things done. Whereas, I prioritize getting a design that I believe in before implementing. They appear to think politics is a protocol and a coin is like a government. There is a core philosophical difference. I have implemented hacks in the past and made a lot of money (e.g. CoolPage was a hack in my opinion even though it fulfilled a market need, I wasn't satisfied that it didn't import general HTML because of a disonance between pixel-aligned layout and HTML in general...and I was never able to think of a way to make the two resonate so that is one reason I stopped working on while I was trying to find a solution and never came back to it after 2001).

I don't think I should try to change Dan, nor would he try to change me. He has implemented a lot and I have implemented not much (just some code, no launched coin).

At this point, I am less interested in being a voice of the community or driving the work of some other group that has philosophical tension with me (e.g. include Monero in that group even though I know they have very smart developers) and more interested in finding a design I believe in and implementing. Because at this point I feel shame for not having delivered a coin (or found a coin to contribute to which I believed in).

I like technical discussions, so a discussion with Dan isn't out-of-the-question, but I think it is not the right priority now. Also I would be in a better position in discussion if I had also accomplished a coin, so that it would look like I am just whining.


Edit: this is where I think politics and government ends up: