Thread by @bquittem

1/ Time to shine a light on Bitcoin’s informal governance, often called a “culture war.”

Let's explore “in-fighting,” lessons learned from failed forks, dispel forking FUD, and highlight benefits of Bitcoin’s informal governance.

New essay:
cryptomenow.com/bitcoin-cultur…

Thread 👇

2/ TL;DR: Bitcoin culture wars are a net positive.

A necessary mechanism to market test ideas. Failed divergences minimize attack surface and refine the core message. Ultimately this lowers user acquisition cost. Failed attempts become battle scars. Makes bitcoin stronger.

3/ Bitcoiners generally agree upon the important stuff: 21m supply cap, censorship resistance, ease of verification.

However, mutually exclusive ideologies emerge, ie: “cheap payments on base layer” vs “decentralization of node operators.”

When visions collide? Culture wars.

4/ No formalized process to change bitcoin (voting, etc). However that doesn’t mean pure chaos. Public discourse is relevant, precedent is leveraged like the US Supreme Court, and social norms solidify.

Learn bitcoin governance from @pierre_rochard:
medium.com/@pierre_rochar…

5/ When differences cannot be resolved, the intolerant minority, if sufficiently motivated, can fork Bitcoin. Node operators "vote" by running the “bitcoin version” they support.

Theoretically, the ability to fork prevents excessive bickering and allows the market to decide.

6/ Next, I will attempt to dispel forking FUD, summarize lessons learned from failed forks, and explain three surprising benefits to these “culture wars.”

7a/ “Forking is a form of inflation”

Forking bitcoin code doesn’t mean it has value. Why would anyone want it? Need confidence/infrastructure. Forks fail because they don't mobilize the social consensus.

So does forking Bitcoin dilute the supply? The answer is no.

7b/ “Forking erodes Investor confidence”

@Frances_Coppola claims Bitcoin’s history of forking makes it unstable.

-Majority of community agree on the big stuff (tiny % fight loudly online)
-Toxic twitter debates are relatively unknown to the world
-Rigorous debate is healthy

8/ Lessons learned from Bitcoin forks:

-Forking is not a form of inflation
-Vocal minority chains represent a small percentage of the overall community
-The market doesn’t value forks (BCH, BCH SV, Gold)
-Minority chain (same PoW algo) is vulnerable to 51% attack

9/ Outstanding Q: what will happens to the Bitcoiners who pursued “failed forks?”

Will they “bend the knee” and come back to the BTC community, or will they double down on their “defeats?” The 🏀 is your court, @rogerkver.

Either way, bitcoin doesn't give AF

10/ Even if forking isn’t common anymore, culture wars will continue in Bitcoin.

The next obvious skirmish will be: fungibility vs a verifiable supply. Should Bitcoin prioritize privacy/fungibility on the base chain over the ability to verify total supply?

11/ Next let’s explore some benefits of Bitcoin’s culture wars that aren’t talked about as much:

-Failed cultural divergences minimize attack surface
-Refine the core message
-lowers user acquisition cost

12a/ Communities that don’t embrace candid discussion become frail & vulnerable.

Bitcoin's "cultural skirmishes" are a method for testing new ideas internally (low stakes). Bad ideas are exposed before being implemented into the protocol. This minimizes Bitcoin’s attack surface.

12b/ Cultural skirmishes allow Bitcoin to shed bad ideas + refine the message. Can point to dead ends (on-chain scaling) and move on. The internal community discusses the best way to represent Bitcoin externally.

PS most debates are old news @yassineARK

https://twitter.com/yassineARK/status/1047978606297792513

12c/ This cultural war over the prevailing narrative is not exclusive to the Bitcoin community, however. The entire crypto community is fighting over how to brand this whole phenomenon. Is the prevailing narrative “blockchain everything” or “better money?”

h/t @nlw

12d/ #3 Ultimately, converging on messaging will lower bitcoin's user acquisition cost.

Most people need to hear about Bitcoin 3-4x before deciding whether they want to acquire any. What if better messaging reduced the required number of touch points?

FIN/ Whatever doesn’t kill Bitcoin only makes it stronger.

Bitcoin evolves as an expression of the market participants. Each time Bitcoin survives a cultural skirmish, it’s better prepared for future battles with increasingly more at stake.

PS/ Credit for inspiration and mentions: @TheBlueMatt @yassineARK @hasufl @JWWeatherman_ @pierre_rochard @nlw @rogerkver @Frances_Coppola

Thank you 🙏