<p dir="ltr">Miners currently only collect an almost negligible portion of their revenue from fees. While I certainly welcome any proposals that move us in the direction of defining a smooth metaconsensus process, I think with the curent economics, miners (and especially those with significant hashing power) have more of an incentive to block txs/spam their votes than to adapt to tx sender preferences...unless people increase their tx fees significantly. But without wallets that can make decent suggestions in this regard, this feature will be almost inaccessible to most regular users. And the economics still aren't entirely clear.</p>
<p dir="ltr">- Eric Lombrozo</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jun 12, 2015 12:30 PM, "Jannes Faber" <<a href="mailto:j.faber@elevate.nl">j.faber@elevate.nl</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">I'm imagining in Peter's proposal it's not the transaction votes that are counted but only the votes in the blocks? So miners get to vote but they risk losing money by having to exclude counter voting transactions. But garbage transactions are no problem at all.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Note that users that want to cast a vote "pay" for that by increased confirmation time (on average, hopefully slightly depending on the trend).</p><div class="elided-text">
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, 20:27 Matt Whitlock <<a href="mailto:bip@mattwhitlock.name" target="_blank">bip@mattwhitlock.name</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 11:20 am, Mark Friedenbach wrote:<br>
> Peter it's not clear to me that your described protocol is free of miner<br>
> influence over the vote, by artificially generating transactions which they<br>
> claim in their own blocks<br>
<br>
Miners could fill their blocks with garbage transactions that agree with their vote, but this wouldn't bring them any real income, as they'd be paying their own money as fees to themselves. To get real income, miners would have to vote in accordance with real users.<br>
<br>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" target="_blank">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div><br>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>