Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.149.56 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.149.56; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail149056.authsmtp.com; 
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 19:44:51 +0100
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
Message-ID: <20150612184450.GG19199@muck>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck> <23144512.HX7dfatEFr@crushinator>
	<20150612183421.GE19199@muck> <3287607.HcH18TyfSu@crushinator>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9sSKoi6Rw660DLir"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3287607.HcH18TyfSu@crushinator>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
Precedence: list


--9sSKoi6Rw660DLir
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:36:31PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:34 pm, Peter Todd wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:22:36PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > > Why should miners only be able to vote for "double the limit" or "hal=
ve" the limit? If you're going to use bits, I think you need to use two bit=
s:
> > >=20
> > > 	0 0 =3D no preference ("wildcard" vote)
> > > 	0 1 =3D vote for the limit to remain the same
> > > 	1 0 =3D vote for the limit to be halved
> > > 	1 1 =3D vote for the limit to be doubled
> > >=20
> > > User transactions would follow the same usage. In particular, a user =
vote of "0 0" (no preference) could be included in a block casting any vote=
, but a block voting "0 0" (no preference) could only contain transactions =
voting "0 0" as well.
> >=20
> > Sounds like a good encoding to me. Taking the median of the three
> > options, and throwing away "don't care" votes entirely, makes sense.
>=20
> I hope you mean the *plurality* of the three options after throwing away =
the "don't cares," not the *median*.

Median ensures that voting "no change" is meaningful. If "double" + "no
change" =3D 66%-1, you'd expect the result to be "no change", not "halve""
With a plurality vote you'd end up with a halving that was supported by
a minority.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000127ab1d576dc851f374424f1269c4700ccaba2c42d97e778

--9sSKoi6Rw660DLir
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=Z04x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9sSKoi6Rw660DLir--