I was tired when I wrote that, its is full of colloquialisms. let me elaborate.
Shawns post directly addressed @hloo because he has been a vocal critic of any changes to the mining rewards distribution. (as have I)
Saying that these threads that the “advocates” make are not for people to complain in, but for people to say good things. So stuff like “zcash promised 90% of rewards to miners” shouldn’t be in those threads. How far this extends? I do not know. I feel that even critique actual flaws in the plan will be moved from that thread.
So he is asking that I do not post in those threads as not to derail them. Because the line between critiquing an idea and “against changes to the FR” is subjective. I will not post in those threads.
This means those threads will quickly devolve into people just agreeing with each other without putting critical thinking in because they are positive to the initial idea. This is called an “echo chamber” where all you hear is like minded opinions rattling around. This is not great and rarely produces things that work.
As I said in my post, I will respect the will of the community and not post in those threads. In fact I have made my position clear on this topic. There is no space for /my/ opinion in this conversation (in realtion to ZIP’s, and therefore the protocol), because it is the wrong opinion. Which is disappointing.
EDIT: the other side of this argument is that strong dissenting voices will discourage some from sharing their ideas. It one thing I have been wrestling hard with. I feel very strongly on the dev fund, but this isn’t about me. It is about everyone. So I don’t want to intimidate or stop people from posting.
In all fairness though, it is all just wasted keyboard strokes until the ECC signals their intent (4days from now?)