Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 06, 2016, 07:52:36 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 05, 2016, 06:50:14 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 05, 2016, 01:35:10 PM

Quote from: gmaxwell on February 05, 2016, 08:37:20 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 05, 2016, 07:59:33 AM

Jeff registered this very forum.

Nah, the forum was kicked off Bitcoin.org in 2011 due to concerns about the lax moderation-- even I was part of that discussion.

In terms of commits: Matt and Luke predated Jeff on the project (by months in Luke's case). Pieter came nine days after him, Wladimir 51 days after that. I was 8 months behind on the commits, though most of what I do has never been coding-- I my logs show that I was the most active person in the development discussion channel the same month as Wladimir's first commit.

Characterizing someone who came later or who was earlier by mere days and less involved as "senior" is a bit of an insult.

Fair enough. I was just trying to expain how the author might have been justified in choosing those words. (I wasn't the author.)

Re: Blockstream's strategic alliances; I don't know if this is a popular idea around here, but I see Bitcoin as a public good. Are you in a position to reveal the precise nature of these new relationships? Are you inclined to? Are there contracts?

^This is a private company. They don't owe anyone any explanations. Now get back to work, peasant!

That seems a bit harsh. Undecided

It's a matter of journalistic integrity. He has the right to not answer, I have the responsibility to ask the tough questions. Do you think I enjoy this?