The problem here is that the end user should be who core works to serve. And the end user in this case is the node operators. But most of the funding for core does not come from the end users. So core effectively works to serve who they really work for, and that's not the end user anymore. All that doesn't explain how a dev who hates bitcoiners, insulted bitcoiners on two occasions, expressed that she was into shitcoins, referred to spam as "use cases we have today", found her way to become the head maintainer in less than 3 years. And BTW, if core is such an open and transparent project, can anyone here answer the following questions: - Who are the top 5 financial contributors to core? Who finances core? Sources? - Who are the 3 owners of the M88 Chính core repo? - Who are the people with merge access? Do we know any of these things? Core pays homage to transparency with cheap gestures. But core is not a transparent institution at all. But transparent or not, well structured or not, what really matters is the end product. Core failed to do anything against the spam for the last 5 years. And that inaction went too far when core started to actively blow up an existing spam filter for very suspicuous reasons. The fact is that when Luke Dashjr proposed an ordinal filter that would have stopped and prevented a large part of the chain bloat and UTXO bloat we have today, core decided it was too controversial. They didn't care about UTXO bloat at the time. And community controversy was a sufficient reason to reject a filter. But when they wanted to blow up a filter, suddenly community controversy non longer mattered and core suddenly was worried about UTXO bloat. The controversial excuse and the UTXO bloat excuse are only used in service of spam, and completely ignored when not in service of spam.
The problem here is that the end user should be who core works to serve. And the end user in this case is the node operators. But most of the funding for core does not come from the end users. So core effectively works to serve who they really work for, and that's not the end user anymore. All that doesn't explain how a dev who hates bitcoiners, insulted bitcoiners on two occasions, expressed that she was into shitcoins, referred to spam as "use cases we have today", found her way to become the head maintainer in less than 3 years. And BTW, if core is such an open and transparent project, can anyone here answer the following questions: - Who are the top 5 financial contributors to core? Who finances core? Sources? - Who are the 3 owners of the M88 Chính core repo? - Who are the people with merge access? Do we know any of these things? Core pays homage to transparency with cheap gestures. But core is not a transparent institution at all. But transparent or not, well structured or not, what really matters is the end product. Core failed to do anything against the spam for the last 5 years. And that inaction went too far when core started to actively blow up an existing spam filter for very suspicuous reasons. The fact is that when Luke Dashjr proposed an ordinal filter that would have stopped and prevented a large part of the chain bloat and UTXO bloat we have today, core decided it was too controversial. They didn't care about UTXO bloat at the time. And community controversy was a sufficient reason to reject a filter. But when they wanted to blow up a filter, suddenly community controversy non longer mattered and core suddenly was worried about UTXO bloat. The controversial excuse and the UTXO bloat excuse are only used in service of spam, and completely ignored when not in service of spam.

The problem here is that the end user should be who core works to serve. And the end user in this case is the node operators. But most of the funding for core does not come from the end users. So core effectively works to serve who they really work for, and that's not the end user anymore. All that doesn't explain how a dev who hates bitcoiners, insulted bitcoiners on two occasions, expressed that she was into shitcoins, referred to spam as "use cases we have today", found her way to become the head maintainer in less than 3 years. And BTW, if core is such an open and transparent project, can anyone here answer the following questions: - Who are the top 5 financial contributors to core? Who finances core? Sources? - Who are the 3 owners of the M88 Chính core repo? - Who are the people with merge access? Do we know any of these things? Core pays homage to transparency with cheap gestures. But core is not a transparent institution at all. But transparent or not, well structured or not, what really matters is the end product. Core failed to do anything against the spam for the last 5 years. And that inaction went too far when core started to actively blow up an existing spam filter for very suspicuous reasons. The fact is that when Luke Dashjr proposed an ordinal filter that would have stopped and prevented a large part of the chain bloat and UTXO bloat we have today, core decided it was too controversial. They didn't care about UTXO bloat at the time. And community controversy was a sufficient reason to reject a filter. But when they wanted to blow up a filter, suddenly community controversy non longer mattered and core suddenly was worried about UTXO bloat. The controversial excuse and the UTXO bloat excuse are only used in service of spam, and completely ignored when not in service of spam.

The problem here is that the end user should be who core works to serve. And the end user in this case is the node operators. But most of the funding for core does not come from the end users. So core effectively works to serve who they really work for, and that's not the end user anymore. All that doesn't explain how a dev who hates bitcoiners, insulted bitcoiners on two occasions, expressed that she was into shitcoins, referred to spam as "use cases we have today", found her way to become the head maintainer in less than 3 years. And BTW, if core is such an open and transparent project, can anyone here answer the following questions: - Who are the top 5 financial contributors to core? Who finances core? Sources? - Who are the 3 owners of the M88 Chính core repo? - Who are the people with merge access? Do we know any of these things? Core pays homage to transparency with cheap gestures. But core is not a transparent institution at all. But transparent or not, well structured or not, what really matters is the end product. Core failed to do anything against the spam for the last 5 years. And that inaction went too far when core started to actively blow up an existing spam filter for very suspicuous reasons. The fact is that when Luke Dashjr proposed an ordinal filter that would have stopped and prevented a large part of the chain bloat and UTXO bloat we have today, core decided it was too controversial. They didn't care about UTXO bloat at the time. And community controversy was a sufficient reason to reject a filter. But when they wanted to blow up a filter, suddenly community controversy non longer mattered and core suddenly was worried about UTXO bloat. The controversial excuse and the UTXO bloat excuse are only used in service of spam, and completely ignored when not in service of spam.