From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:26:20 -0400
Message-ID: <1466351.XXvDcu7nzO@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/3.18.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAOG=w-up7-wp2NnK52jeCLvcSWvbC-iT-YRDoA=10QhU=K14-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck>
	<CAOG=w-up7-wp2NnK52jeCLvcSWvbC-iT-YRDoA=10QhU=K14-g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
Precedence: list

On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 11:20 am, Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> Peter it's not clear to me that your described protocol is free of miner
> influence over the vote, by artificially generating transactions which they
> claim in their own blocks

Miners could fill their blocks with garbage transactions that agree with their vote, but this wouldn't bring them any real income, as they'd be paying their own money as fees to themselves. To get real income, miners would have to vote in accordance with real users.