From: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2015 00:12:12 +0200
Message-ID: <2586092.4ZtH253X8E@coldstorage>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDpwMQzju+Gsoe3qMi60MPr7OAiSuigy3RdA1xh-SwFzbw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T16fH+56isq95m4+QWsKwP==tf75ep8ghnEcBoV4OtZJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T10y6-=c7Qg6jysnf38wRX3NA3wWozxGfE+mEYJvPeqWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpwMQzju+Gsoe3qMi60MPr7OAiSuigy3RdA1xh-SwFzbw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process
Precedence: list

On Friday 7. August 2015 19.33.34 Jorge Tim=F3n via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> When "the network runs out of capacity" (when we hit the limit) do we=

> expect anything to happen apart from minimum market fees rising (abov=
e
> zero)?

How many clients actually evict transactions from their mempool current=
ly? If=20
the backlog grows infinitely (as a result of more in than out), that wo=
uld be=20
a problem.
How many wallets re-transmit their transaction when your local full nod=
es=20
mempool no longer has it? Problem.

What will the backlash be when people here that are pushing for "off-ch=
ain-
transactions" fail to produce a properly working alternative, which=20
essentially means we have to say NO to more users. We can't service you=
,=20
sorry. Please go away.

At this time and this size of bitcoin community, my personal experience=
 (and=20
I've been part of many communities) saying NO to new customers will kil=
l the=20
product totally. Or, if we are lucky, just make an altcoin that quickly=
=20
becomes the de-facto standard.
--=20
Thomas Zander