[Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function

Tier Nolan tier.nolan at gmail.com
Fri May 29 14:09:20 UTC 2015


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> But if there is still no consensus among developers but the "bigger blocks
> now" movement is successful, I'll ask for help getting big miners to do the
> same, and use the soft-fork block version voting mechanism to (hopefully)
> get a majority and then a super-majority willing to produce bigger blocks.
> The purpose of that process is to prove to any doubters that they'd better
> start supporting bigger blocks or they'll be left behind, and to give them
> a chance to upgrade before that happens.
>

How do you define that the movement is successful?

For


> Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for
> determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges
> and miners are running.
>

The measure is miner consensus.  How do you intend to measure
exchange/merchant acceptance?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150529/84672694/attachment.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list