Bitcoin Unlimited - Visual Identity

[TrevinHofmann]

Sounds good. Let me know if you need help configuring it. The Comodo certificates from Namecheap come in separate files. You have to chain the certificates together in the right order, or some browsers will not accept it.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

@theZerg I did some typo and style cleanup on the main page text. Some conceptual/message changes may be in order as well, but for now:

The Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) project seeks to provide a voice to all stakeholders in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Every node operator or miner can currently choose their own blocksize limit by modifying their client. Bitcoin Unlimited makes the process easier by providing a configurable option for the accepted and generated blocksize via a GUI menu. Bitcoin Unlimited further provides a user-configurable failsafe setting allowing you to accept a block larger than your maximum accepted blocksize if it reaches a certain number of blocks deep in the chain.

By moving the blocksize limit from the protocol layer to the transport layer, Bitcoin Unlimited removes the only point of central control in the Bitcoin economy - the blocksize limit - and returns it to the nodes and the miners. An emergent consensus will thus arise based on free-market economics as the nodes/miners converge on consensus focal points, creating in the process a living, breathing entity that responds to changing real-world conditions in a free and decentralised manner.

This approach is supported by the evidence accumulated over the past six years. The miners and node operators have until now been free to choose a soft limit which, as demand grew, has always been increased in a responsive and organic manner to meet the needs of the market. We expect miners to continue in this tested and proven free-market way by, for instance, coordinating to set a new generated blocksize limit of 2MB and reject any blocks larger than 2MB unless they reach 4 blocks deep in the longest chain. As demand increases, the limit can easily be increased to 3MB, 4MB, and so on, thus removing central control over the process of finding the equilibrium blocksize by allowing the free market to arrive at the correct choice in a decentralised fashion.

As a foundational principle, we assert that Bitcoin is and should be whatever its users define by the code they run, and the rules they vote for with their hash power.

Bitcoin Unlimited seeks to remove existing practical barriers to stakeholders expressing their views in these ways.

For more details, read our Articles of Federation.

The Bitcoin Unlimited client is not a competitive block scaling proposal like BIP-101, BIP-102, etc. Instead it tracks consensus. This means that it tracks the blockchain that the hash power majority follows, irrespective of blocksize, and signals its ability to accept larger blocks via protocol and block versioning fields.

If you support an increase in the blocksize limit by any means -- or just support Bitcoin conflict resolution as originally envisioned by its founder -- consider running a Bitcoin Unlimited client.

I've colored areas where I made changes/additions/deletions in red:

The Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) project seeks to provide a voice to all stakeholders in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Every node operator or miner can currently choose their own blocksize limit by modifying their client. Bitcoin Unlimited makes the process easier by providing a configurable option for the accepted and generated blocksize via a GUI menu. Bitcoin Unlimited further provides a user-configurable failsafe setting allowing you to accept a block larger than your maximum accepted blocksize if it reaches a certain number of blocks deep in the chain.

By moving the blocksize limit from the protocol layer to the transport layer, Bitcoin Unlimited removes the only point of central control in the Bitcoin economy - the blocksize limit - and returns it to the nodes and the miners. An emergent consensus will thus arise based on free-market economics as the nodes/miners converge on consensus focal points, creating in the process a living, breathing entity that responds to changing real-world conditions in a free and decentralised manner.

This approach is supported by the evidence accumulated over the past six years. The miners and node operators have until now been free to choose a soft limit which, as demand grew, has always been increased in a responsive and organic manner to meet the needs of the market. We expect miners to continue in this tested and proven free-market way by, for instance, coordinating to set a new generated blocksize limit of 2MB and reject any blocks larger than 2MB unless they reach 4 blocks deep in the longest chain. As demand increases, the limit can easily be increased to 3MB, 4MB, and so on, thus removing central control over the process of finding the equilibrium blocksize by allowing the free market to arrive at the correct choice in a decentralised fashion.

As a foundational principle, we assert that Bitcoin is and should be whatever its users define by the code they run, and the rules they vote for with their hash power.

Bitcoin Unlimited seeks to remove existing practical barriers to stakeholders expressing their views in these ways.

For more details, read our Articles of Federation.

The Bitcoin Unlimited client is not a competitive block scaling proposal like BIP-101, BIP-102, etc. Instead it tracks consensus. This means that it tracks the blockchain that the hash power majority follows, irrespective of blocksize, and signals its ability to accept larger blocks via protocol and block versioning fields.

If you support an increase in the blocksize limit by any means -- or just support Bitcoin conflict resolution as originally envisioned by its founder -- consider running a Bitcoin Unlimited client.

 

[TrevinHofmann]

I would love to have a more interactive site; at one point I was thinking of allowing people to dynamically annotate the white papers for example.

I missed this part. If you want an interactive site, it might be better to go with React.js as a front end framework. It can work just as well as Jade for templating and separating content from the template. Jade is better for static pages, while React.js melds JavaScript with the template to allow for very dynamic pages.

 

[Windowly]

WRT SSL: How cheap is "fairly cheap"?

You should be able to use Let's Encrypt -- the give free certificates to encrypt the web.
https://letsencrypt.org/

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

If we have something interactive, a little interactive demo of how the acceptance depth tolerance would work would be awesome. That way people could see how BU "tracks consensus."

 

[Windowly]

@Aquent @theZerg About the website -- have we pretty much decided what links we're going to use? In the visuals I made I used http://bitcoinunlimited.info/faq for the FAQ sheet, but now it goes to an error page and the correct link is faq.html

I don't mind either case. If you guys decide to stick with faq.html I'll put that in visuals from now on. (Although I'd argue taking out the '.html' makes it look neater.)

Likewise, the download button on bitco.in doesn't work either. (It's the same problem where it used to be a directory and now it goes to an html address)

 

[TrevinHofmann]

I can't guarantee anything, but we will probably drop the .html extension. I'm going to do some refactoring on the site, and that will be part of it if nobody minds.
[doublepost=1451527322][/doublepost]I can also add redirects so that we don't end up with any dead links.

 

[Aquent]

Yeah, I think dropping html is far better and cleaner and adding a simple 301 redirect would probably be useful. I just didn't have time to neat up everything.

 

[Windowly]

Cool! Someone complained on twitter that a link in a tweet I had posted yesterday wasn't working so probably the sooner everything is fixed the better.

We don't want to loose any momentum.

We're around 84-92 nodes. . . I can't wait till we reach hundred!
[doublepost=1451547895][/doublepost]I don't know if this is the right place for issues like this. . . but the difference in background color (off-white to white) here really annoys me every time I see it. Was that on purpose or?

Also if there was just a little bit more space between the bar and the letters here it might look nicer.
[doublepost=1451548231,1451547575][/doublepost]Perhaps the FAQ can have the questions in bold to make them stand out more? If we wanted to do really fancy we could even have a different font for the questions.

Also, one of the questions is missing a return between the question and the answer.

 

[TrevinHofmann]

>I don't know if this is the right place for issues like this. . . but the difference in background color (off-white to white) here really annoys me every time I see it.

That probably was not on purpose. I'll fix it.

>Also if there was just a little bit more space between the bar and the letters here it might look nicer.

Yes, there seem to be a couple of problems with the footer. It also loses the full width on the FAQ page. I'll work on that.

>Perhaps the FAQ can have the questions in bold to make them stand out more? If we wanted to do really fancy we could even have a different font for the questions.

I'll figure something out for those. It definitely needs something to break up the wall of plain text. I think bolded and slightly bigger questions would help.

>Also, one of the questions is missing a return between the question and the answer.

Good spot! I'll fix this, also.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

The current text on the main page has multiple typos and parts that are unreadable (acceptance depth of "N mb" doesn't even make sense). I strongly recommend replacing it with my corrections above or at least removing the typos ASAP.

 

[jbreher]

Is the website in a CM system such as git? Can I fork, edit suggested corrections, and issue a pull req? There are some things in the copy text that are bugging me.

 

[TrevinHofmann]

Yes, https://github.com/gandrewstone/BitcoinUnlimitedWeb.

 

[Bloomie]

@chmod755 I am not sure if r/bitcoin_unlimited is being used. I thought mentioning r/btc there might help set r/btc as the go to sub rather than r/bitcoin. I think that's pretty important right now so I'd rather leave it as r/btc, but if you guys think otherwise then that's cool with me.

Most people don't realize that Reddit itself is a very centralized place, and its free-spirit, libertarian image is nothing more than a PR gimmick anymore. It's owned by a division of one of America's biggest companies, Condé Nast, a company that publishes Glamour, Vogue, and lots of other soul-sucking shit magazines. I also don't have a lot of faith in r/btc. If you study the links in the sidebar of that subreddit, you'll see that it's just a platform to promote Ver's commercial projects.

 

[Aquent]

The current text on the main page has multiple typos and parts that are unreadable (acceptance depth of "N mb" doesn't even make sense). I strongly recommend replacing it with my corrections above or at least removing the typos ASAP.

Thanks @Zangelbert Bingledack . As no one has further added or commented on your text I take it that all are in agreement with the amendments you made. Just added a pull request for @theZerg to review: https://github.com/gandrewstone/BitcoinUnlimitedWeb/pull/5 Do have a look and let me know what you think.

@Bloomie I agree with you and I vocally criticised the sub for seemingly having only bitcoin.com links on the sidebar and almost no links to anywhere else during that whole btcdrak debacle. It seems that they won everyone over when they removed him as mod and published the mod mail though and Coinbase loudly asked for everyone to go there so, that's where we are.

If anyone has any suggestions we can add more links to congregating places in that space though. I just need to coordinate with @TrevinHofmann to tidy up the code (which is a bit of a mess right now as I wanted to get up quickly something reasonable looking) so that changes can be made easier and quicker and new contributors can get up to speed faster.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

I have to agree the open modmail move was quite good. I think /u/SouperNerd has taken criticisms to heart, has a much better grasp on how to do properly non-intrusive moderation, and may well turn things around. Short term strategy-wise that is the place, and it's very BU-friendly at the moment. Plus namespace is second-best after /r/Bitcoin. If /r/btc grows abusive, people can migrate to /r/bitcoin_unlimited as fast as they migrated to /r/btc.

 

[Peter R]

Yes, please let's get @Zangelbert Bingledack's edits up ASAP. Already, someone has copied this description along with the typos to here https://bitcoin.consider.it . Perhaps whoever is responsible for updating the web content should ask someone with a good eye for detail like ZB to take a look if there's any question in the future.

A couple other notes:

1. On both my browsers, I'm only seeing two pictures in the slide show. @Graphics picture with the blocks hanging from the chain (which I loved) appears to be missing.

2. Can we remove the HTML links to Satoshi's paper and my fee market paper? The diagrams and equations are all garbled so I'd rather make these PDF-only.

3. Under FAQs: the second question is repeated twice.

 

[Aquent]

Nice to see Bitcoin Unlimited was added to it for consideration. That's jtoomim's site if I am not mistaken?

I've put in a pull request for the blockchain pic, just waiting for @theZerg to merge.

 

[Bagatell]

@Aquent Blame me. https://bitco.in/forum/threads/https-bitcoin-consider-it-a-bitcoin-consensus-census.703/

 

[Aquent]

Well done, thanks