I, like many of you, was born human. Unfortunately, I was born flawed and full of character defects. I was born filled with lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and most of all pride. Despite my flaws, I wish to see a true Money Libre realized into the world. This is my end goal, and I wish to work with anyone who shares that goal.
Money Libre would free us all from tyranny. It would free us from the endless wars we have heard about for our entire lives. Money Libre would put everyone on equal footing. Footing from which they can succeed or fail by their own.
Money Libre is the most important goal anyone could assist in realizing.
Recently, I have published two articles which pertain to our goal of Money Libre. The first about the current political situation in Bitoin Cash - arguing that Bitcoin Cash's identity is contingent upon the Bitcoin ABC project. The second being about how decisions are made, and arguing that nobody is in charge of Bitcoin Cash.
The first argument, summarized below, is that Bitcoin Cash is Amaury's project by identity:
Bitcoin Cash is defined by what consumers believe to be Bitcoin Cash. Consumers believe Bitcoin Cash to be a product that is compatible with the Bitcoin ABC software. Therefore, exchanges selling coins which are not compatible with Bitcoin ABC software would be potentially guilty of fraud. As a result, Bitcoin ABC, and thus Amaury Séchet, define what features Bitcoin Cash has, or does not have.
No amount of rhetoric within r/btc, or twitter, is going to change the expectations quorum of exchanges and users to change this fact. Those who are traveling down this path are wasting their time that could be spent on more productive endeavors.
Now, it is also argued that Bitcoin Cash is not Amaury's project. Rightfully so, it is everyone's project. Thus, the second perspective is this:
Bitcoin ABC is not Bitcoin Cash. However, Bitcoin ABC is Amaury's project and he is free to include or exclude any functionality he wishes within his Bitcoin Cash client. Users of this software are free to continue running it or not. Thus, Amaury does not have any control over Bitcoin Cash and should not be subject to criticism over the changes he chooses to make in his client.
These arguments are seemingly in disagreement. However, both statements I believe to be true, and form a complete perspective. "Imaginary Username", a thought leader in the Bitcoin Cash cryptocurrency investor network, correctly noticed that my publicly stated viewpoints seem inconsistent.
Now, everyone should be able to agree that it is true that either Amaury Séchet is the leader, or he is not the leader.
It is precisely because everyone is in charge that Amaury Séchet is unable to force his will upon them. Is it because everyone is in charge that the opposition has been unable to achieve their goals? The opposition continually levels complaints regarding what Amaury does, or does not include, in Bitcoin ABC. However, Bitcoin ABC is not Bitcoin Cash, it is just Bitcoin Cash because we've all implicitly agreed to that.
This is why some people feel powerless - because social consensus does not support the changes they wish to make. Twitter and r/BTC are not representative of the true economic power and consumer sentiment behind Bitcoin Cash. People who are not getting their way are truly just frustrated that social consensus does not support them. They must take out their frustration on people who are freely making changes to software that nobody is forced to run.
Those individuals who continue to publicly complain in public about the hegemony of Amaury within Bitcoin Cash protocol development are actually directing their frustrations with ethereal social consensus onto the King of the Bitcoin Cash Protocol. He is the King precisely because Bitcoin Cash is a decentralized project. He is the leader, because we choose to follow him (and complaining about him is an act of following)
It should be clear, to anyone who knows me, that I do not desire for Amaury to be King. However, I believe that it is critical that reality be accepted for what it is, and make decisions from there.
If I were to refuse to believe my conclusions, about who is in charge of the protocol, I would continue to waste time trying to interact at the protocol development level. I would not be spending my time on more productive endeavors like Stamp and CashWeb.
After three years of working on Bitcoin Cash, the primary things that I can conclude are that:
Human beings are horribly flawed.
People don't want to take responsibility for their decisions.
Many libertarians do not want to accept reality when it conflicts with their ideology - just like communists and fascists.
Libertarians suck at collaborating.
We may never realize our goal because we're too busy fighting about who isn't in charge to realize that there are bigger problems at stake.
I wish the best to Shadow Of Harbringer, freetrader, Imaginary Username, and others. I wish the best for their effort to become the deciders on Bitcoin Cash protocol specifications. However, I do not believe they will be successful.
I will be choosing to spend my time developing useful front-end technology for users. The Bitcoin Cash protocol is not the rudder of the ship, it is the engine. Control of the engines, at best, allows you to slow or speed up the ship - to halt the project. It does not allow you to steer the ship. Being the interface to cryptocurrency for end-users does.
An iceberg is coming, and nobody is at the helm.
Ok man honestly you have said enough over the last week.