Return-Path: <nxtchg@hush.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E6C0BC7
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from smtp10.hushmail.com (smtp10.hushmail.com [65.39.178.143])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6155B16F
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp10.hushmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp10.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 18DE8C0180
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w7.hushmail.com [65.39.178.32])
	by smtp10.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99)
	id A196641A3E; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:58 +0000 (UTC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:25:58 +0300
To: "Greg Sanders" <gsanders87@gmail.com>
From: "NxtChg" <nxtchg@hush.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB3F3Ds=_DG0Z75gmMPWJ=YWga61s7zkL+dkhVkuzTqCg6zf_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
	<CABm2gDr3orTHMN1q8vGmy3NpXWPy5i=zHhGneDGUk=ney3-e+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150627120935.GD25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
	<20150627121505.6E857417EC@smtp.hushmail.com>
	<CAB3F3Ds=_DG0Z75gmMPWJ=YWga61s7zkL+dkhVkuzTqCg6zf_w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20150627122558.A196641A3E@smtp.hushmail.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:25:59 -0000


On 6/27/2015 at 3:18 PM, "Greg Sanders" <gsanders87@gmail.com> wrote:

>Can we agree n-1 dev Nacks would be a controversial hard fork?

That requires an assumption that all developers are perfectly representing the whole community.

And no shady lobbying behind the scenes too.