The point I was responding to is the point that it is was client responsibility.

My response, not part of my original post, is that clients do not always do what is necessary to protect users and often have code bugs.

Since a consensus rule can protect the user when a client doesn't, then a user does not need to know how well the client is coded to be protected from that kind of a mistake.

I don't care if the developers reject that point, but it should not have been hidden from them by a list moderator. That's my point in this thread.

If you want this to be an open project, then giving a list moderator the power to veto a message in an approved discussion is counter to that.

And that is exactly the kind of atmosphere that fuels forks like XT and Classic that I believe are bad for bitcoin.

It doesn't matter if the devs think it is too stupid to respond to, it shouldn't be hidden from them or from others reading the thread in an archive.

P.S. - I love Opus