> EDIT: As expected, anything that's not bashing crypto (preferably with unrelated arguments) rakes in downvotes. Aah the lovely HN hivemind.

I’m guessing you’re getting downvoted because

1) you’re assuming a lot about what this guy intended and giving him a lot of credit when he clearly didn’t understand the topic, and

2) you end with “you might want to look more into crypto yourself if you care to learn” which almost seems like trolling because it’s essentially what this guy told Wales.

Thanks for the explanation but:

> 1) you’re assuming a lot about what this guy intended and giving him a lot of credit when he clearly didn’t understand the topic

I'll quote Daniel Krawisz's tweets with added emphasis on the points which indicate he wasn't proposing storing content on a blockchain:

> It would be so cheap to record [enough information] about all @Wikipedia interactions on the $BSV blockchain [...]

Key word "enough", suggesting "not all".

> My point is just that because because Bitcoin transactions always leave records, someone who uploaded illegal content would leave you with more [contextual information] that you could track on the blockchain than you would have if there weren't payments associated with their interactions.

"contextual information" == "metadata"

> 2) you end with “you might want to look more into crypto yourself if you care to learn” which almost seems like trolling because it’s essentially what this guy told Wales.

That was more about noticing the irony in GP chastising the tweeter for their ignorance and then showing seemingly greater ignorance about the same topic.

GP perhaps misunderstood the proposal. That doesn’t mean their ignorance is greater. I think the misunderstanding is quite reasonable given that the tweet was proposing a completely nonsensical plan. I think your reading of the intent is correct, but I also think this proposal was so poorly thought through that it doesn’t matter.

Also, don’t use brackets for emphasis. Brackets are used editorially to replace content or leave an editorial note. Using them for emphasis makes it look like you actually changed the core of the quote. And they make it harder to read.

Your edit is against the HN etiquette guidelines.

There's no dedicated place to discuss meta-topics in here, and I feel the virulent anti-blockchain sentiment on HN is more detrimental to the quality of discussion than my small one-liner complaint at the end of an on-topic explanatory comment.

Nope. If you believe HN is anti-blockchain and this is worth discussing, then create a new post or a dedicated comment in a relevant thread about it.

You weren’t starting a conversation about this perceived bias. You were just whining about downvotes.