Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18B05279 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 22:25:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f41.google.com (mail-qg0-f41.google.com [209.85.192.41]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88F30143 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 22:25:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgy5 with SMTP id 5so53690491qgy.3 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:25:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=WCUwof2gfO4gJfGhS9wqqpSWkakVBZXqWXOT0Dy4tU4=; b=pkao9sSivVYFe4CWF0jM4yAsE+eA8ekm8j0q9Lv/S0wduXkpMNvghsjg/NOQ4YruK3 xa/mVYhvqPDFC/MZ7e0X84DxwByJqGkSAlYMRAnRcqqsBQQcEmpXN+kuUL0nyIJn3c+U RN7HGuZxAlzLQsxFUUhWZq8nv+xDdMzUj22zYm2F9B3S6jdF7L8s8L2v/g3jeLUiyFke LHd3aOgsCiNNXmQIurl4ef+E5liyKWwU2aeA5iFY+ROd109Qw/DAiPHaaQ3NVSug/Oqq Uw2ORIR8ey59f/BD4/131pZ9bcUeM+YNirQHJlyOwoflGBuDgplVo9OWFIFrTiYiVdoR mC9Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.217.149 with SMTP id n143mr23754441qhb.9.1437171906745; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.93.162 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:25:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201507172029.17056.luke@dashjr.org> References: <201507172029.17056.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 23:25:06 +0100 Message-ID: From: Tier Nolan Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11373518fb9ea5051b19a853 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, MALFORMED_FREEMAIL, MISSING_HEADERS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 102 - kick the can down the road to 2MB X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 22:25:08 -0000 --001a11373518fb9ea5051b19a853 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Luke Dashjr wrote: > Hardforks are not something where voting makes sense. They need consensus > among /nodes/, not majority among /miners/. No hardfork has ever had such a > vote. > Agreed. I meant that since some of the new hard fork proposals use a voting system for activation, they may not want to establish that precedent. --001a11373518fb9ea5051b19a853 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On F= ri, Jul 17, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wro= te:
Hardforks are not something where vot= ing makes sense. They need consensus
among /nodes/, not majority among /miners/. No hardfork has ever had such a=
vote.

Agreed.

I meant that since= some of the new hard fork proposals use a voting system for activation, th= ey may not want to establish that precedent.
--001a11373518fb9ea5051b19a853--