The War is Over - The Voluntarists Have Won

9 294
Avatar for DavidsonBCH
Written by
4 years ago

First of all, congraulations to Bitcoin Cash Node on becoming the first development team to reach their fundrasing goal via flipstarter.

Also, massive thanks should also go to the Flipstarter dev(s), this form of funding is an amazing development and fits in with the voluntarist ethos of Bitcoin.

Developer Funding

Massive debate has raged over this the past two months and whilst it has maybe made me realise how underappreciated dev work goes, the catalyst for this should have been avoidable.

The IFP being put into code was a stab in the back to pretty much everyone except ABC and their miner friends who asked for it.

The vast, vast majority of people in BCH do not want it and it should have been removed as quick as it was put in.

Maybe it is too late to remove it now as they claim but you had plenty of time to do this and so you only have yourself to blame for how this has turned out.

Voluntary Funding

We have proven as a community voluntary funding works and whilst by seeing BCHN fully funded, and BCHD, Verde and Knuth being on their way now as well.

The only campaign lagging in this is ABC and for them to pretend they don't understand why is laughable.

This screenshot below from their most recent article here on read.cash says it all for me.

You are in my opinion holding a gun to people's heads and demanding they donate or else.

This is simply not on.

And I write this as someone who has donated to yourselves, I was reluctant to speak out so vocally before as I wanted to see how the community voted with the donations and now I think it could not be clearer.

Going Forward

With funding and support for developer teams coming in from the community and businesses within BCH we are entering an exciting time where ABC will now be knocked off their pedestal.

I still hope they continue to contribute in this space and learn from this and do not blame the community, they are entirely to blame for this.

I also do not want to see personal attacks on people as that is not the way forward but I think we can all agree that ABC you have not came out of this looking good and the quicker you publicly accept and apologise for your wreckless actions the better.

Here is to a new era in Bitcoin Cash development!

13
$ 2.66
$ 1.00 from @RogerVer
$ 0.50 from @unitedstatian
$ 0.50 from @jonald_fyookball
+ 6
Avatar for DavidsonBCH
Written by
4 years ago

Comments

Good one

$ 0.00
User's avatar Okondi55
4 years ago

Woo-hoo! Yeah, that is great news indeed!

$ 0.00
User's avatar Read.Cash
4 years ago

"That's Communism!" they said before they split off to BSV. Little did they know, that in reality they simply weren't understanding the core of that pervasive yet new idea of voluntaryist philosophy in the space.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Koush
4 years ago

Let the market decide! That's how it should work in this community. Thanks to Flipstarter team to make it happen for us to see it clearly.

$ 0.00
User's avatar p0oker
4 years ago

The IFP is nothing less than a market-based approach.

$ 0.10
User's avatar Koush
4 years ago

A very bad approach. Look at the damage it made

$ 0.01
User's avatar danmelo
4 years ago

You are putting the cart in front of the horse. The IFP proposal was not the thing that has done the damage. For all I know it could have been simply accepted by a significant majority after maybe some minor improvements and be a very suitable funding solution while satisfying market-anarchist ideals.

And if you agree, that it is indeed a market-based approach, then it means the contentiousness of it was, as I repeatedly point out, based on wrong assumptions and bad judgement, which makes all remaining arguments fall apart. I also could make the exact same argument you just made against anti-IFP measures and it would be sensible. But I won't, because it's missing the point.

Or do you think BCH scaling was "also a bad approach" because of the damage surrounding it? Just as it was the right decision to go on with scaling despite supposed contentiousness, it is absolutely reasonable to go on with the IFP, despite some people, who have mostly unreasonable arguments or suspicions. Taking this as yet another reasoning is making this a goalpost moving snake eating its own tail that will lead us nowhere. Besides maybe looping us back into the next drama.

The IFP is a voting mechanism built in Bitcoin after all. I don't see how anyone can fear that, who counts on Bitcoin and doesn't want to rely on trust. The idea that it "can be gamed" is also simply a wrong assumption not taking economic incentives into account. Just because no one gave you or others making such statements any pushback, doesn't mean it isn't wrong. It may just mean you are in an echo chamber.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Koush
4 years ago

I am a voluntaryist and the IFP is a form of voluntary funding.

You are in my opinion holding a gun to people's heads

This is a misrepresentation. The passage you quoted is a simple statement of fact. You can not remain coherent while using the voluntaryist logo and in the same article claiming that recognizing that X or Y incentive exists is a credible threat of aggression.

Incentives are part of what power voluntary interactions. Incentives are a fact of reality. We don't get to wish them away. That is what the statists do.

P.S. Why are you talking about war? Sounds violent and zero-sum.

$ 0.20
User's avatar georgedonnelly
4 years ago

The only campaign lagging in this is ABC and for them to pretend they don't understand why is laughable.

It is important to point out that ABC is raising the vast majority of funds for its current fundraising campaign outside Flipstarter. ABC self-reports its overall progress as 43.96% of 14500 BCH, which would actually mean ABC has raised more funds than any other node in the current round of campaigns.

$ 0.10
User's avatar BigBlockIfTrue
4 years ago
About us Rules What is Bitcoin Cash? Affiliate program Get sponsored Self-host hello@read.cash