The case for privatizing Bitcoin Core

The dialogue opens with an acknowledgment of the inherent challenges in implementing a rigorously moderated policy for pull requests (PRs) within software development projects, particularly those as complex and decentralized as Bitcoin. The original advocate for this approach concedes that realizing such a policy is far more complicated than it might initially seem, highlighting the difficulty of operationalizing abstract ideas into concrete actions. This admission segues into a broader discussion on the nature of decision-making processes in open-source communities, especially those related to Bitcoin's development and protocol evolution.

A significant point of contention revolves around the establishment of exclusive forums or spaces dedicated to Bitcoin development. While the idea of creating an online space solely for developers to collaborate seems appealing, there are reservations about its practicality and effectiveness. The discourse suggests that even if such a space were to achieve higher adoption rates than current private development efforts, it would not exclude the existence of other forums filled with diverse opinions, including those from non-developers. Such diversity of thought outside the exclusive realms could either be ignored by developers due to lack of time or interest, undermining the purpose of having a dedicated space for focused development work.

Further complicating the issue is the notion that decisions regarding Bitcoin's development should not be confined to a single platform like GitHub or restricted to private discussions. The text implies a growing concern over the perception of "Bitcoin Core" as a distinct entity with its own policy and political stance, a view exacerbated by the renaming of the Satoshi client to "Bitcoin Core." The author expresses regret over this nomenclature change, reflecting on the divisive implications it carries within the Bitcoin community.

The underlying challenge, as identified in the conversation, is how to facilitate a development environment that supports effective engineering work without fully resolving the contentious issues surrounding decision-making processes and community engagement. This dilemma underscores the complexity of managing open-source projects, where balancing technical goals with community dynamics remains an ongoing struggle. Despite these challenges, the goal of creating a tolerable and functional environment for developers is highlighted as a valid and critical objective, encapsulating the nuanced realities of software development within highly decentralized and scrutinized ecosystems like Bitcoin.