Difference between revisions of "Category talk:History"
(remove references to tonal as NN (not notable), and the recent change on github has been NACKed, so not lookng likely to be implemented any time soon.) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Why is the Tonal junk in there? No-one uses iot, and I remember there being one guy heavily pushing for it, to the point of spamming. Might want to remove it... [[User:Gigitrix|Gigitrix]] 01:37, 13 June 2011 (GMT) | Why is the Tonal junk in there? No-one uses iot, and I remember there being one guy heavily pushing for it, to the point of spamming. Might want to remove it... [[User:Gigitrix|Gigitrix]] 01:37, 13 June 2011 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Given the recent github pull by luke-jr (the only advocate for tonal bitcoin AFAIK) has recently been NACKED, and no one else is advocating this, nominating this nor seconding this proposal, I agree that the tonal mentions are not worthy of mention in this article. If we see strong support coming in for tonal bitcoin, then this should of course be reviewed, but I would suggest any further pushing of this agenda should be considered to be disruptive to the bitcoin project, and appropriate action taken. Juding from luke-jr's comments on this wiki and on github I am failing to see any benefits from tonal bitcoin, and plenty of disadvantages, confusion and disruption from its continued mention. Consequently I have now deleted references to it from the article. --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 23:02, 20 March 2012 (GMT) | ||
Revision as of 23:02, 20 March 2012
Why is the Tonal junk in there? No-one uses iot, and I remember there being one guy heavily pushing for it, to the point of spamming. Might want to remove it... Gigitrix 01:37, 13 June 2011 (GMT)
Given the recent github pull by luke-jr (the only advocate for tonal bitcoin AFAIK) has recently been NACKED, and no one else is advocating this, nominating this nor seconding this proposal, I agree that the tonal mentions are not worthy of mention in this article. If we see strong support coming in for tonal bitcoin, then this should of course be reviewed, but I would suggest any further pushing of this agenda should be considered to be disruptive to the bitcoin project, and appropriate action taken. Juding from luke-jr's comments on this wiki and on github I am failing to see any benefits from tonal bitcoin, and plenty of disadvantages, confusion and disruption from its continued mention. Consequently I have now deleted references to it from the article. --Rebroad 23:02, 20 March 2012 (GMT)
