The case for privatizing Bitcoin Core

The discourse on the privatization of Bitcoin Core software development stems from recurrent challenges faced within the open-source community, particularly on platforms like GitHub. These challenges include the intrusion of non-contributors and non-developers into forums designed for collaborative development work, leading to time wastage, controversy, and misinformation. The essence of open-source development is the freedom for developers to collaborate as they wish, a principle that underpins the voluntary efforts behind Bitcoin and Bitcoin Core development. There's an acknowledgment that while developers have no obligations beyond their license, many are driven by personal moral values such as educating the uninformed or protecting users from security threats.

The limitations of GitHub in terms of moderation controls have prompted a reevaluation of collaboration methods within the Bitcoin Core project. The proposal to shift towards a privatized, members-only collaboration platform aims to mitigate issues like brigading and spam by making discussions, issues, and pull requests private and inaccessible to non-members. This approach endeavors to preserve the spirit of open development while creating a more controlled environment for contribution and discussion. The suggested model allows for registration or application for access, with the site or repository administrators handling configuration, moderation, and access control. Despite the privatization, the commitment to open-source principles remains, with the continuation of software development under the same license and the possibility of cross-posting to public repositories.

An alternative to this model is the ongoing trend of development within closed offices, which, while less accessible, offers a precedent for more secluded forms of collaboration. The proposed system aims to strike a balance between completely public forums that are susceptible to disruptive behavior and entirely closed development environments. It suggests mechanisms for entry such as a delay, probationary period, or recommendations from existing members, ensuring a level of gatekeeping to maintain order within the community.

The broader context includes concerns over the sustainability of open-source projects amidst external pressures and coercive attempts by non-technical actors to influence development directions. By creating a more selective forum for discussion and development, the initiative hopes to shield contributors from undue influence and focus on productive development. However, it also recognizes the importance of remaining open to the wider community through public code reviews and releases, maintaining a flow of information without compromising the integrity of the development process.

This proposition is rooted in a desire to safeguard the project against adversarial forces and ensure its continued success. The realization of such a model requires careful consideration of how to balance openness with the need for a protected space for development. Through thoughtful structuring of participation and engagement, the goal is to foster an environment that encourages growth and innovation in Bitcoin Core development while mitigating the risks associated with open forums.