From: Isidor Zeuner <cryptocurrencies@quidecco.de>
To: Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <55FC8CEB.9070508@gmail.com>
	<CAOG=w-t2ZYQbx8+mG5FX8vzgAC_tb8A6KMABmudHQbrquEqX-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55FC8CEB.9070508@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <20150920114152.988F2E6DCCA@quidecco.de>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:41:52 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Improving Blocksize Communication Through Markets
Precedence: list

Hi there,

replies in-line:

[...]
> 4. Do you ever stop and think: How much *money* was spent for everyone
> to travel to Montreal, stay at their hotels, and to rent the conference
> venue and broadcasting accommodations?

Not to mention that trying to solve a global issue with a conference
local to Montreal is a good example for _centralizing_ Bitcoin...

[...]
> More details are on the project page ( http://bitcoinblocksize.com/ ),
> some technical details are in the Github README.
>

I agree that letting the market decide is the way to go. But I
don't understand why we would want to have yet another
(side-)chain because of that. The market can already decide at the
point where _every_ Bitcoin user starts to discriminate the Bitcoins
he accepts between the client versions of the blocks where the
Bitcoins come from (and the corresponding BIPs where the version
numbers relate to). If a miner decides to follow a particular block
size policy against the will of the community, the market could
quickly rectify it when the miner realizes that no one accepts the
resulting coins anymore, leading to financial loss for the miner.

Best regards,

Isidor