This topic is straying from Bitcoin development into general Bitcoin governance, policy, or other meta-issues.
We have now the new bitcoin-discuss mailing list now, specifically for these more free-flowing topics: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-discuss Please take further discussion of this thread to that forum. Thank you, The bitcoin-dev moderation team On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Peter R via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > It looks like some specific meta-level criteria would help more at this > point than new proposals all exploring a different variants of block size > increase schedules. > > I agree. In fact, I’ll go meta on your meta and suggest that we should > first discuss how Bitcoin should be governed in the first place. Should > Bitcoin evolve from the “bottom up,” or from the “top down”? > > If one’s answer is from the “top-down,” then the meta-level criteria can > be endlessly debated, for they all involve some sort of tradeoff, they all > require some sort of compromise. The “top down” perspective holds that > people might make poor choices if given the freedom to easily do so--it > holds that the trade-offs must be balanced instead by experts. > > However, if one's answer is from the “bottom up,” then the meta-level > criteria is very easy: we do what the people wants. We allow the people to > weigh the tradeoffs and then we watch as consensus emerges through a > decentralized process, objectively represented by the longest proof-of-work > chain. > > Regarding the block size limit debate, at the end of the day it comes down > to two things: > > 1. How big of a block will my node accept today? > > 2. What do I want my node to do if the longest chain includes a block > larger than the limit I set? > > If one concedes that Bitcoin should be governed from the “bottom up,” then > it is already possible to empower each node operator to more easily express > his free choice regarding the size of blocks he is willing to accept, while > simultaneously ensuring that his node tracks consensus. > > Best regards, > Peter > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
