--- Log opened Wed Mar 17 00:00:58 2021
00:25 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2401:4900:30df:4b1c:6d14:3f85:cf7d:24e9] has joined ##taproot-activation
01:50 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:05 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:23 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:36 < elector> michaelfolkson: you need to tone down, I see you're more like a janitor around here. I assure you that you represent none much less the entire mining community and a 1 trilion dollar bussines. You can believe whatever you want thats your prerogative
02:36 < elector> I am upset that I was woken up from enjoying other parts of my life for a battle
02:36 < elector> that failed to take place. I could care less about yall politics, the real talk will
02:36 < elector> happen when you make the move and put your reputation at stake.
02:37 < elector> to all young folk: it is your duty to learn the past otherwise you will get burnt. R
02:37 < elector> ealize that the old dragons are idling around enjoying life but when the game is on
02:37 < elector> the swarm will decimate most of you.
02:37 < elector> Dont try to weezle your way in with quick upgrades so we don't have much time to warm up. We can tank this easier than you think. Next year we can get back to where we were a year ago. We're not in for a short ride.
02:38 < stortz> what the fuck
02:40 -!- jnewbery [~john@164.90.178.190] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:46 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2401:4900:30df:4b1c:6d14:3f85:cf7d:24e9] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:47 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:55 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: belcher_
03:03 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:07 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
03:09 -!- Teleportando [8eb30758@d142-179-7-88.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:36 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:36 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:46 -!- peterrizzo_1 [44c18924@ool-44c18924.dyn.optonline.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
04:40 < elector> I gotz more :)
04:40 < elector> You're intentionally delaying this for winter time to sacrifice as many sheep and make a spectacle of it.
04:40 < elector> That's fine. We too enjoy a good bloodbath but for this your scapegoats will go down with you.
04:59 < queip> elector: you what mate
05:00 < elector> that's on you. I have no control over what you are able to understand
05:00 < elector> What's going on is multi-layered. Money is just a representation of it. ^^^ is the b
05:00 < elector> eginning of what's about to come.
05:33 -!- peterrizzo_1 [44c18924@ool-44c18924.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
05:38 -!- belcher_ is now known as belcher
05:46 <@michaelfolkson> elector: I don't know what you are on about but hopefully you are enjoying yourself. For now I will ignore you but anymore of the "swarm will decimate most of you" threats and I will regrettably ban you from this channel
05:48 <@michaelfolkson> I think I will pursue a BIP number for Speedy Trial. I've thought about doing so before but I was hoping to avoid it. But I think now it is impacting the quality of PR review and code review and that in my view is unacceptable
05:50 <@michaelfolkson> PR review and code review is so much more important than what BIP number we say we're using. Or that having a cloud over PR review
05:56 < elector> it's not a treat unless you take things literarly, but hey you do you
05:57 <@michaelfolkson> We have Andrew's Speedy Trial PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21392
05:57 -!- kabaum [~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:57 < elector> unless you're ignorant about it you are aware that this discussion is censored and 1. if it's censored you won't get to truth and 2. others have to use symbolic language to escape censorship
05:58 <@michaelfolkson> And AJ's Speedy Trial draft PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21377
06:00 <@michaelfolkson> There was more activity and review on Andrew's PR but AJ is still working on his PR (which is totally fine, competing PRs are normal)
06:01 <@michaelfolkson> There are more code changes in Andrew's PR but at least some of them are removing BIP 9 references/code whilst AJ is keeping them in
06:02 <@michaelfolkson> What the focus should be on is what code and what commits are merged but we still have this BIP number annoyance that is clouding that
06:04 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.169.45.97] has joined ##taproot-activation
06:05 <@michaelfolkson> If this literally becomes a PR vs PR conversation over which BIP number is used that would be farcical imo
06:07 <@michaelfolkson> For the moment Andrew has cherry picked commits from other authors including tests whilst AJ hasn't. I think AJ eventually will (at least Sjors test commits) on his PR
06:08 < elector> I don't really care, it's your move. You make the bet and then we play.
06:08 <@michaelfolkson> (For anyone observing please ignore elector, he is just spamming the channel at this point)
06:10 < elector> right, ok. What you actually did was create distractions to cover shame. It's just a preview for whats to come. If you think what you do has no consequences ask the victims of Segwit
06:10 < mol> michaelfolkson, chill, dude, you're the one who's spamming the channel right now
06:11 < belcher> leave michaelfolkson alone
06:11 < mol> elector, you need to chill too
06:12 < elector> I was chill before you summoned me with the promise of a battle :) but you backed out without shame
06:16 < Emcy> irc fights are so 1995
06:17 < Emcy> youre all just text on a screen
06:17 < Emcy> so cool your fucking jets
06:17 < elector> emcy: again, what you're able to understand its on you
06:19 < Emcy> in english?
06:21 < Emcy> nevermind, youre probably just nuts
06:21 < mol> i just created channel ##taproot-offtopic, you guys are welcomed to chat there with any topics so we can keep this channel 'on-topic'
06:23 < elector> the discussion is on-topic, the symbolic language is to escape censorship. If you're not aware of the censorship then good, you will make mistakes and then you'll pay for them
06:23 < elector> emcy: just like the book that you didn't understand is stupid :) you are evaluating something according to what you understand
06:25 < elector> I understand you guys have not been challenged yet, but thats because theres nothing to gain in a nothing at stake game
06:26 <@michaelfolkson> I think this channel has died unfortunately. It had a good run
06:26 < elector> when the taproot upgrade starts everything will change
06:27 <@michaelfolkson> Ok I won't be monitoring the conversation here. I can't ban elector because mol is accusing me of doing the spamming (nice touch). So I'll just gracefully leave. Have a good day
06:28 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.169.45.97] has quit [Quit: jonatack_]
06:28 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has joined ##taproot-activation
06:29 < elector> everyone is agreeing with you before the shuffle so that you make mistakes, and you put your bets in then thats when the actual game starts. And you will be taken for all your money weather that means reputation or whatever else your bet with
06:29 < elector> You're fooling yourselves taproot is "easy"
06:29 < belcher> its a mistake to allow a few trolls to kill an entire channel for such an important update, someone with ops should just ban the spammers and let the channel get on as normal
06:30 <@michaelfolkson> So ban elector? mol effectively said I should be banned
06:30 < Emcy> i dont see mol on the op list my dude, only you
06:31 <@michaelfolkson> Ok I'll ban elector. I won't ban mol (within their rights to say I'm spamming though I dispute this)
06:31 < Emcy> conversation around taproot is hard enough without vexatious interlopers, dont you think
06:32 -!- mode/##taproot-activation [+b *!~elector@gateway/tor-sasl/elector] by michaelfolkson
06:32 -!- elector was kicked from ##taproot-activation by michaelfolkson [Your behavior is not conducive to the desired environment.]
06:32 < Emcy> ok cool
06:35 < stortz> that was the weirdest thing
06:37 < belcher> people trying to troll online communities is a story as old as time, it happens all the time on #bitcoin let alone somewhere like reddit.com/r/bitcoin
06:40 < mol> michaelfolkson, where did i say you should be banned?
06:41 <@michaelfolkson> mol: " chill, dude, you're the one who's spamming the channel right now"
06:41 <@michaelfolkson> Regardless, can we move on please
06:41 < mol> yes did it say you should be banned? and yes you're very noisy and spammy pretty mmuch
06:42 <@michaelfolkson> Can we move on?
06:52 -!- mol [mol@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/molly] has left ##taproot-activation ["Leaving"]
07:14 -!- shesek`` [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has joined ##taproot-activation
07:15 -!- shesek` [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:23 <@michaelfolkson> luke-jr podcast with Stephan Livera on Taproot activation. I'll get a transcript up https://stephanlivera.com/
07:36 -!- shesek` [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has joined ##taproot-activation
07:37 -!- shesek`` [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:06 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
08:17 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:17 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:19 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@205.209.28.54] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:23 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:23 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:57 -!- nehan [~nehan@41.213.196.104.bc.googleusercontent.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
08:57 -!- nehan [~nehan@41.213.196.104.bc.googleusercontent.com] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:12 < devrandom> what's the issue with BIP #s, and why would it affect progress on the PRs?
09:13 <@michaelfolkson> devrandom: There is old BIP 9 code in the Core repo and references to BIP 9 which Andrew's PR takes out and AJ's doesn't
09:14 <@michaelfolkson> I think the BIP number is going to be the only sticking point. Andrew's PR is "using" BIP 8 and AJ's PR is "using" BIP 9
09:16 <@michaelfolkson> I don't think Andrew will have a problem with AJ's code or vice versa. So I think this is potentially going to be the only sticking point.
09:17 <@michaelfolkson> Andrew's has a greater code diff because he is taking out and renaming BIP 9 stuff. AJ isn't.
09:18 < devrandom> OK.  I'm going to start looking at Andrew's PR now
09:19 <@michaelfolkson> Cool, thanks
09:19 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-230-226.dyn.295.ca] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:19 < roconnor> michaelfolkson: what is needed beyond https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1080 ?
09:21 <@michaelfolkson> roconnor: I don't understand the question. In terms of BIPs if Speedy Trial is using BIP 8 that BIP 8 PR looks fine to me
09:22 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2401:4900:30df:5e1e:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:22 < luke-jr> michaelfolkson: I've encouraged Andrew to avoid changing variable names FWIW
09:22 <@michaelfolkson> I think BIP number is only point of contention at this point. The code differences between Andrew's PR and AJ's PR can easily be worked out as they always are with competing PRs
09:22 < luke-jr> it's enough for the documentation to be corrected
09:23 <@michaelfolkson> Ok cool
09:23 < luke-jr> leaving variable names alone has no user-visible effect, and helps make backporting cleaner
09:23 < luke-jr> we can fix them in master later
09:23 <@michaelfolkson> Gotcha, thanks. Makes sense
09:23 < roconnor> michaelfolkson: Sorry, my question was in regards to "I think I will pursue a BIP number for Speedy Trial."
09:24 < roconnor> But I'm starting to think I misunderstood what you meant by that. :D
09:24 <@michaelfolkson> roconnor: I think BIP number is only point of contention at this point. It would be a dumb reason to stop Speedy Trial from being merged
09:24 < luke-jr> where is it contentious?
09:24 <@michaelfolkson> So I'm happy to get a new BIP number for Speedy Trial as a third option to try to avoid this contention
09:25 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:25 <@michaelfolkson> I don't think it is necessary. I think BIP 8 is fine. But I don't want it preventing Speedy Trial from being merged
09:25 <@michaelfolkson> (whenever it is ready)
09:26 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:26 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Client Quit]
09:29 < prayank> michaelfolkson: I hope new BIP number doesn't make it rushed approach because I have seen few people calling it rushed upgrade.
09:37 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2401:4900:30df:5e1e:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
09:44 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:03 -!- maaku [~quassel@ec2-54-186-10-232.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has left ##taproot-activation ["https://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere."]
10:14 < harding> michaelfolkson: is there anyone besides you who thinks the BIP number is a point of contention?
10:15 <@michaelfolkson> harding: I'll happily be proved wrong. That's the only thing I'm personally concerned about for Speedy Trial at this point
10:15 <@michaelfolkson> If there's no contention there I don't think we have contention
10:15 < harding> As I think I've mentioned before, the BIP that matters is BIP341, which will specify the activation parameters.
10:16 <@michaelfolkson> Recent comments from Rusty and AJ on this https://gist.github.com/michaelfolkson/92899f27f1ab30aa2ebee82314f8fe7f
10:17 < harding> michaelfolkson: yeah, that's why I'm here, your comments seem very unrelated to what AJ said.
10:18 <@michaelfolkson> So what do you read into what AJ said? He clearly doesn't like BIP 8 (as he is entitled to)
10:19 <@michaelfolkson> But to criticise BIP 8 with the same criticisms you could apply to BIP 9 or any activation mechanism seems very weak to me
10:19 < harding> I read it as an effective reply to rusty's argument.  It says almost nothing about his own opinions, just that he thinks other people's arguments have merit.
10:19 < luke-jr> michaelfolkson: I don't see that as cricisim of BIP 8 per se
10:19 <@michaelfolkson> The latter part starts "I think it also probably assumes that the bip8 approach is more ready to go than it is -"
10:20 < luke-jr> he's talking about the implementation details, not the BIP
10:20 < harding> michaelfolkson: which is reasonable because he's talking about the infrastructure for handling a chainsplit, not BIP8 itself.
10:21 <@michaelfolkson> What infrastructure for handling a chainsplit? I keep asking what exactly that is and I don't get details
10:21 < luke-jr> harding: well, that's not reasonable since BIP8 isn't chainsplit
10:21 < harding> E.g., BIP148 nodes preferentially peered with other BIP148 nodes, which is not in any of the BIP8 PRs.
10:21 < harding> luke-jr: but a chainsplit could be the result.
10:21 < luke-jr> harding: less likely than with BIP9 or any other mechanism
10:22 < harding> luke-jr: no.
10:22 < luke-jr> smh
10:23 <@michaelfolkson> A chainsplit could happen with any scenario where there are two competing incompatible activation mechanisms
10:24 <@michaelfolkson> Obviously we want to do everything to avoid a chainsplit. But there's not much to be done in the unlikely unfortunate case where there is one
10:25 < harding> michaelfolkson: I just descibe something that could be done, preferential peering.  There's lots else that can also be done, such as giving the user useful warnings.
10:25 <@michaelfolkson> Why that is relevant to ST I have no idea. Why the BIP 8 approach is not ready to go, again I have no idea
10:25 <@michaelfolkson> harding: Right preferential peering is one thing. I think it is a bad idea but sure we could discuss that
10:26 <@michaelfolkson> (in the context of a ST?)
10:26 < luke-jr> harding: we already have preferential peering
10:26 < harding> luke-jr: in your UASF client?
10:26 < luke-jr> harding: in Core
10:26 < luke-jr> harding: if any of our 8 outbound peers don't agree on tip or validity, we disconnect them and find another peer
10:27 <@michaelfolkson> But why is this relevant for a ST (say using BIP 8)? This just makes no sense to me whatsoever
10:28 < luke-jr> actually, I wonder if that could cause problems (for any softfork)..
10:29 < luke-jr> if both old nodes and new nodes are disconnecting each other, we could end up with a partition; even if it's just outbound, since one will always be outbound
10:30 -!- common [~common@unaffiliated/common] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:30 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:30 < harding> michaelfolkson: where did aj say that his concerns about BIP8 being ready affect ST?
10:32 <@michaelfolkson> "I think it also probably assumes that the bip8 approach is more ready to go than it is -- there are (IMHO) serious unresolved objections to bip8 in every possible deployment mode"
10:32 <@michaelfolkson> https://gist.github.com/michaelfolkson/92899f27f1ab30aa2ebee82314f8fe7f#gistcomment-3667989
10:32 < harding> luke-jr: there shouldn't be a problem between old nodes and new nodes in a SF, right?
10:32 <@michaelfolkson> This is on a gist discussing ST. This isn't a mailing list post on why BIP 8 shouldn't be used assuming ST fails
10:33 < luke-jr> harding: if the old nodes accept an invalid block, the new nodes will exclude them from outgoing connections and vice versa?
10:33 < harding> michaelfolkson: yeah, that's clearly refering to rusty's argument, which aj quotes in his reply, that says, "Instead, if we codify "devs propose, miners activate, users override" (i.e. a LOT=true option, off by default) we'll know exactly what the process will be when miners fail to activate"
10:33 <@michaelfolkson> "there are (IMHO) serious unresolved objections to bip8 in every possible deployment mode"
10:33 < harding> luke-jr: ok, that makes sense.
10:34 <@michaelfolkson> I don't know how you read that as anything other than BIP 8 should not yet be used even for ST
10:34 < harding> michaelfolkson: again, he's saying that other people have objections, and that "in his honest/humble opnion", he thinks those arguments might have merit.
10:35 <@michaelfolkson> Serious unresolved objections and we shouldn't use BIP 8 (for ST or anything)
10:36 <@michaelfolkson> I don't think we should use something with serious unresolved objections. I don't think a ST BIP 8 has any serious unresolved objections though
10:36 -!- lucasmoten__ [~lucasmote@136.144.35.169] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:37 < luke-jr> michaelfolkson: context
10:38 < harding> michaelfolkson: again, I believe aj was talking about rusty's propopsal to do "BIP8{LOT=false), see if there's miner activation, then encourage users to flip a command line argument for LOT=true".  I think it's only you that sees him arguing against BIP8 for ST.
10:38 < harding> It seems objectively true that there are people who object to rusty's proposal given that luke-jr, here right now, is one of them.
10:38 -!- lucasmoten_ [~lucasmote@136.144.35.169] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
10:39 <@michaelfolkson> Ok if I'm wrong I apologize. He has also opened a competing PR using BIP 9 code (which he is entitled to do).
10:39 < harding> aj saying that he thinks those concerns are worth considering is a good thing because he's one of the best thinkers in this space, someone I'd certainly want considering things.
10:39 < luke-jr> harding: looking at the code, I think we're safe actually, since the tip check also tolerates a more-work peer tip
10:40 < luke-jr> michaelfolkson: wasn't that PR opened prior to Andrew's?
10:40 < harding> michaelfolkson: he opened the first PR for ST, the only thing it competed against was nothing.
10:40 < luke-jr> he should close it probably, but I wouldn't draw conclusions from the fact that he hasn't yet
10:41 <@michaelfolkson> harding: Absolutely he is. I hope I can criticize his argument (or my perception of his argument) without it being a criticism of him personally. I have huge respect for him as I do all of you
10:41 < harding> michaelfolkson: and it was suggested in this room, and mentioned in detail in my post about ST, that using BIP9 would be the smallest diff, so the easiest to review.  Which is a clear advantage in my mind.
10:42 < harding> michaelfolkson: I found your most recent post on the gist to be frustrating because, like I said, it seems to arguing against things he didn't say.
10:43 <@michaelfolkson> "there are (IMHO) serious unresolved objections to bip8 in every possible deployment mode" That's what I read
10:43 <@michaelfolkson> I'm happy to delete my response though?
10:43 <@michaelfolkson> Should I do that?
10:44 < harding> michaelfolkson: I think it'd be better to put an edit at the bottom saying you think you might have misread aj's post (if you actually think that) and then privately emailing aj to ask him what he meant exactly.
10:45 <@michaelfolkson> Ok will do, thanks for advice harding
10:47 < harding> michaelfolkson: np.  To be clear, I'm also thankful for all the work you've been putting into activation and I'm sorry that it's been such a frustrating experience for all of us.
10:51 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:53 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
10:53 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.21] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:54 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:55 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.21] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:55 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:55 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:58 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.21] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:58 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:58 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.21] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:59 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:16 -!- awertheim [6167c3a1@097-103-195-161.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:16 -!- awertheim [6167c3a1@097-103-195-161.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Client Quit]
11:46 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: roconnor
12:04 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
12:28 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:52 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:52 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:43 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
14:07 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:07 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:33 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has quit [Quit: -a- Connection Timed Out]
14:37 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:39 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:41 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:49 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.164.14.9] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:52 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.169.45.97] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:59 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:01 -!- cguida2 [~Adium@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:c090:a5b7:3ef1:75c4] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:01 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:01 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:02 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
15:04 -!- cguida1 [~Adium@fixed-189-203-103-76.totalplay.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
15:05 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:05 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:06 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:06 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:06 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:10 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:10 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:11 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:11 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:14 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:14 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-100-22.totalplay.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:21 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@fixed-189-203-100-22.totalplay.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:21 -!- cguida [~cguida@fixed-189-203-100-22.totalplay.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:25 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:29 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@fixed-189-203-100-22.totalplay.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:41 -!- cguida [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:42 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:43 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:46 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
15:47 -!- cguida_ [~cguida@185.81.136.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:47 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:54 -!- cguida [~cguida@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:452d:444d:ea94:d4aa] has quit [Quit: -a- IRC for Android 2.1.59]
15:59 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation
16:17 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.164.14.9] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
16:22 -!- prayank [~andr0irc@2409:4053:2e1b:69dd:ccd9:c8c0:52fc:3d02] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:11 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net]
17:19 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@205.209.28.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
18:05 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@97-118-232-73.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
18:25 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@97-118-232-73.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
19:10 -!- common [~common@unaffiliated/common] has joined ##taproot-activation
20:14 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:01 -!- shesek` [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:06 -!- shesek [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:06 -!- shesek [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has quit [Changing host]
21:06 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:19 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:22 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
21:28 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:29 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:34 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:52 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:26 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
22:31 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:02 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:02 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has joined ##taproot-activation
23:02 -!- lucasmoten__ [~lucasmote@136.144.35.169] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:02 -!- lucasmoten__ [~lucasmote@136.144.35.169] has joined ##taproot-activation
23:12 -!- RusAlex_ [~Chel@BSN-77-82-41.static.siol.net] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.0]
23:12 -!- RusAlex [~Chel@unaffiliated/rusalex] has joined ##taproot-activation
--- Log closed Thu Mar 18 00:00:59 2021