Jaja. But no shit. Not perfect maybe, but Bitcoin was never perfect. It has always been good enough. And at the beginning it was quite simple. Simple enough it allowed gradual improvements that anyone with some technical background could understand. Now we need a full website to explain an improvement.

But this is becoming more and more out of topic.

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com> wrote:

I'm highly unconvinced of this point. Sure, you can change fewer lines
of code, but if the result is, lets be honest, shit, how do you believe
its going to have a higher chance of getting acceptance from the broader
community? I think you're over-optimizing in the wrong direction.

Matt

On 05/09/17 20:58, Sergio Demian Lerner wrote:
> I agree with you Matt.
> I'm artificially limiting myself to changing the parameters of Segwit as
> it is..
>
> This is motivated by the idea that a consensual HF in the current state
> would have greater chance of acceptance if it changes the minimum number
> of lines of code.
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org
> <mailto:greg@xiph.org>> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Matt Corallo

> <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com <mailto:lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>> wrote:
> > at beast.
>
> Rawr.
>
>