It's not about crypto, its about process. Compare this action to one by Debian or Wikipedia where there's a formal proposal, time for written pros and cons with convincing arguments for each side, and a meeting where the vote is held and impact to stakeholders is discussed.

You can't make large changes like this without undermining your viability as stable infrastructure.

▲

cyberax 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What "process"?

It's a simple rule: "no cryptocurrency projects".

▲

DaSHacka 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Obviously the 'process' is how you arrive at the rule.

If it was just one guy who arbitrarily decided as such, that's not much of a 'process' and is exactly what GP was calling out.

	▲	cyberax 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No. The process was handled as usual: a proposal was made, and people voted. Overwhelmingly to ban crypto.

▲

birksherty 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Too many scammers in crypto. It's a good decision. Cryptos and scammers can host their own.