Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Pindar Wong
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Stephen Morse wrote: > Pindar, > > yes and it's a good idea to separate the hard/soft fork upgrades. The >> point being here is that we're also establishing a process for the >> community to self-determine the way forward in a transparent and verifiable >> manner.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Vincent Truong
Some changes: Votes need to be 100%, not 50.01%. That way small miners have a fair chance. A 50.01% vote means large miners call the shots. Users (people who make transactions) need to vote. A vote by a miner shouldn't count without user votes. Fee incentives should attract legitimate votes from

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Stephen Morse
Vincent, > Some changes: > > Votes need to be 100%, not 50.01%. That way small miners have a fair > chance. A 50.01% vote means large miners call the shots. > While I like the idea of possibly requiring more than 50%, you wouldn't want to have a situation where a minority of uncooperative (or just

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Stephen Morse
Pindar, yes and it's a good idea to separate the hard/soft fork upgrades. The point > being here is that we're also establishing a process for the community to > self-determine the way forward in a transparent and verifiable manner. > > What's not to like? :) > > I'll probably have some time on Su

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Stephen Morse
> > Why do it as an OP_RETURN output? It could be a simple token in the > coinbase input script, similar to how support for P2SH was signaled among > miners. And why should there be an explicit token for voting for the status > quo? Simply omitting any indication should be an implicit vote for the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-06-02 Thread Matt Whitlock
Why do it as an OP_RETURN output? It could be a simple token in the coinbase input script, similar to how support for P2SH was signaled among miners. And why should there be an explicit token for voting for the status quo? Simply omitting any indication should be an implicit vote for the status

[Bitcoin-development] Max Block Size: Simple Voting Procedure

2015-05-31 Thread Stephen Morse
This is likely very similar to other proposals, but I want to bring voting procedures back into the discussion. The goal here is to create a voting procedure that is as simple as possible to increase the block size limit. Votes are aggregated over each 2016 block period. Each coinbase transaction