read.cash is a platform where you can earn money for your articles and comments. You can get paid upvotes
from other users or us for writing articles and comments, which are paid in
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) cryptocurrency, which can be used on the Internet or converted to your local money.
Distributed Systems Engineer, Stamp CTO, Ex-Bitcoin ABC Developer, ex-Cloudflare
3 months ago
Today, Amaury released an article on his proposal for the next DAA. It seemingly came with a declaration that this DAA will be what ABC is implementing for the November protocol upgrade.
A lot of people in the Bitcoin Cash Cryptocurrency Network are angry and upset that Amaury has made a decision about what he is going to include in the ABC Bitcoin Cash Node software. It's worth examining why people are upset about his behavior.
All feeling are worth examining, because at their core is always a golden nugget of truth. And, understanding the truth allows for making effective decisions about behavior. Feelings alone motivate us to action, but they do not motivate to right action without understanding.
At its core, Anger is generally a secondary emotion. It covers up for a primary emotion that reveals our vulnerability. I would argue, that most of the anger right now is due to individuals feeling afraid, attacked, offended, disrespected, forced, trapped, and pressured - feeling powerless.
And to this, the question is raised: Why do people feel slighted about Amaury's decisions regarding what he does or does not do?
There are many people who claim that Amaury is not relevant to the development of Bitcoin Cash, and then at the same time they are upset and angry whenever he makes a decision they do not agree with. So what is it? Do the decisions of Amaury coercively impact anyone?
I have previously argued that Amaury was both in charge, and not in charge, of Bitcoin Cash. People choose to believe whichever one they want. However, the group of people who continue to assert that he is not in charge, are the very same people who are perpetually upset when he makes a decision.
Their anger implies that they do believe he is in charge. They really do believe that they cannot function without his cooperation. They believe that Amaury should, or should not do, particular things.
Now, I don't think that Amaury handles his responsibilities as lead maintainer well at all. I think he's absolutely horrible at them. Yet, he is the lead maintainer of Bitcoin ABC.
But, ultimately anger is not productive, and continuing to be angry while denying the core of the cause of the anger is even less so.
Those people who are angry with Amaury have several paths they can take:
Continue to believe they do not need to interact with Amaury in the way he wants, and never get any productive work done.
Accept that Amaury is in charge and interact with him in a way that is pragmatic.
Accept that Amaury is in charge of protocol development, and take concrete steps to make that no longer true.
The third option is likely what is currently happening. However, I wonder what he will be replaced with? Every vague proposal sounds like he will be replaced with, something akin to, a dictatorship of the proletariat.
We all know how that ends.
If there is actually a better proposal for how things should be done, I'm all ears. I don't know of one; and I know of no historical examples of any other functional decision making systems.