[meta] moving conceptual discussion for policy changes

The discussion initiates with an acknowledgment of the potential for disruptive behavior on platforms where programming changes, such as pull requests (PRs), are proposed and discussed. It highlights a concern that people may link directly to a PR with the intention of causing chaos, driven by impulsive behaviors akin to road rage. This is described as a reaction when individuals feel their voices are not adequately heard within the PR comments, leading them to express their frustration on social media, thereby amplifying the issue before they have a chance to reconsider their actions. The discourse recognizes that while some may act out of a fleeting impulse, others might be fully aware of the consequences of their actions.

The narrative then shifts to emphasize the importance of providing a constructive platform for feedback, suggesting that those with genuine intentions should have accessible means to express their concerns without resorting to destructive criticism. It points out the challenges posed by existing communication channels, like mailing lists and GitHub, where moderation delays or comment regulation could exacerbate feelings of being ignored or censored, further fueling frustration among contributors.

In terms of procedural suggestions, the message proposes practical measures to mitigate sudden backlash and surprise within the community. One recommendation is to introduce a buffer period, ideally two weeks, between announcing a proposal on the mailing list and submitting the actual PR to Bitcoin Core. This aims to reduce the perception of changes being abruptly imposed. Additionally, marking a PR as a draft with a clear 'do not merge before' notice could help manage expectations and provide a timeline for feedback. Highlighting the expected release date of the Bitcoin Core update (in this case, late 2025) at the top of a PR, along with an assurance that changes can be reversed if compelling arguments are presented, is suggested as another method to foster a more inclusive and less confrontational environment for proposing and discussing new ideas.