Community Roundup #26 – Forks Over Knives

To fork, or not to fork – that is the question.
I’d like to claim I understand the intricacies of the current BIP101 vs BIP100 debate, but unfortunately I don’t. What I (think I) understand is that we won’t be solving this block size puzzle through logic, algorithms and code alone, but through good, old-fashioned, face-to-face negotiations.
What we’ve seen taking place on social media, Reddit, Bitcoin mailing lists, forums and other platforms, is what all of us are already used to – an initial back-and-forth of ideas, followed by a steady descent to accusations, all the way down to name-calling – eventually driving both (all) parties’ heels solidly into the ground. Unlike most online arguments from which we can just walk away (And admit defeat? Never!), while cussing out our opposition, this Bitcoin block size argument doesn’t allow us to do so. This needs to be fixed now/soon/eventually, but it needs to be fixed.
So how do you resolve a digital dispute with the online tools we have today? My answer is simple: you don’t. Plain text exchanged in emails, blogs, PMs, chats – heck, even video calls – do not do justice to a conventional meeting with real face time, accompanied by solid handshakes and coffee breaks, and ending with hearty laughter. . . . So my suggestion to the involved parties is to book a conference room, brew a pot of joe, and don’t come out of the room until you have a solution.
What is that you are saying? You already have a venue booked in Montreal for this?
Get to it.
Tokenly’s chief architect Nick started a thread “Upcoming Bitcoin Hard Fork & /r/bitcoin censorship” in which he mentions:

This post was published at Lets Talk Bitcoin on August 30th, 2015.