You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.
Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".
I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read
I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.
However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.
Mike Hearn is a board advisor at Circle and Gavin is under MIT payroll. Developers need to get paid too you know. By all account most developers are under a certain conflict of interest (think of Garzik also at Bitpay). Assuming they are "problematic" is your own opinion.
"Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like." Just make sure it has some merit..
So your new is argument is "They are all doing it, so why can't we??"
Not winning any meritorious badges with that one.
Nop.
The argument is there is nothing wrong with conflict-of-interest per say when stated. They do not necessarily imply wrongdoing.
Are you stating you don't have any?
How is that? You said Mike is on Circle's board (I don't know what else he does for work, I'm going to guess you probably do though). That's a pretty obvious affiliation and transparent potential COI. Gavin works for a non-profit research institution. You can read out of that whatever you like, but in any case it's not hidden at all.