1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
|
Return-Path: <mjbecze@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2058F51
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:43:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f49.google.com (mail-pa0-f49.google.com
[209.85.220.49])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCE8017B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:43:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pacfv12 with SMTP id fv12so34810911pac.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=OnptDXG+QYMNaWAqWdUs+eSYxQdHWNEbCBkwLCUbjk8=;
b=vN3ES8d3sPJUMYIXmGmFRlkA0jWMmpnUDnpCuT2bmB8LYZPrgHzohejVegoM3iOnMY
xPYsX68m2oat/U1u+M3P9VTskhgXhrHL2yyp16R//k08VqyYSiKLFe7lhHVw6+oiB4Nc
grKfi3h5vm6hVbGdOSP8gLht4psFvgQLZqQoE8jt8LlTSCSZvyb63G8OkvOkJiFHj2A/
B//kEwRxvdowjoj0HRHwWuvjmzWLFCTuPUGAUpUrQ38zpcCD4pU9KZeRhJhXw8s3rEOP
9NuN1mxNUQPOe3hcjkwl1yBMWl85nJ/c7Wm2z/R7VmEZqLAV758dwz+EC7urXoFHi3RK
IcXQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.99.69 with SMTP id eo5mr12252152pbb.167.1441399390539;
Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.157.231 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Sep 2015 13:42:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150904203144.GB463@muck>
References: <64B72DF6-BE37-4624-ADAA-CE28C14A4227@gmail.com>
<CABaSBaw7hM2qmuR6Z6USy5=V9NGeCPKmHHuVOH=vexDk7kY8OA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAxp-m_vo5vJEemR_hRX3hNcUPveA6EHn-ZFMJo8ke59E6BrKw@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzvanj41Dfa4kQsq5SVvt-Zeee2SOfD3Uws-FpBQsyZsqg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAxp-m_EmMbVBqQK9ijoe+n0dAs726TaBX5m1Wgzsv-m1KHdfQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20150904203144.GB463@muck>
From: Martin Becze <mjbecze@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:42:51 +0000
Message-ID: <CALz06g6YGCfnR0V2+jP1pWVXGj9-=hZRz9QHX5mzoz08P1ynKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6d7c70a714da051ef1f24d
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process
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: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 20:43:11 -0000
--047d7b6d7c70a714da051ef1f24d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> Let the market decide
How about Futarchy?
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 01:13:18PM -0700, Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Thanks for your thoughts.
> >
> > My proposal isn't perfect for sure. There's likely much better ways to do
> > it. But to be clear what I'm trying to solve is basically this:
> >
> > Who makes high-level Bitcoin decisions? Miners, client devs, merchants,
> or
> > users? Let's set up a system where everyone has a say and clear
> acceptance
> > can be reached.
>
> It depends on a case-by-case basis.
>
> E.g. for soft-forks miners can do what they want with little ability for
> other parties to have a say. For non-consensus-related standards - e.g.
> address formats - it's quite possible for a BIP to be "accepted" even if
> only a small group of users use the standard. For hard-forks almost
> everyone is involved, though who can stop a fork isn't as well defined.
>
> IMO trying to "set up a system" in that kind of environment is silly,
> and likely to be a bureaucratic waste of time. Let the market decide, as
> has happened previously. If you're idea isn't getting acceptance, do a
> better job of convincing the people who need to adopt it that it is a
> good idea.
>
> No amount of words on paper will change the fact that we can't force
> people to run software they don't want to run. The entire formal part of
> the BIP process is simply a convenience so we have clear, short, numbers
> that we can refer to when discussing ideas and standards. The rest of
> the process - e.g. what Adam Back and others have been referring to when
> attempting to dissuade Hearn and Andresen - is by definition always
> going to be a fuzzy, situation-specific, and generally undefined
> process.
>
> Or put another way, even if you did create your proposed process, the
> first time those committees "approved" a BIP that relevant stakeholders
> disagreed with, you'd find out pretty quickly that "clear acceptance" of
> your 4% sample would fall apart the moment the other 96% realized what a
> tiny minority was intending to do. Particularly if it was one of the
> inhernet cases where the underlying math means a particular group - like
> miners - has the ability to override what another group wants out of
> Bitcoin.
>
> --
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 000000000000000010f9e95aff6454fedb9d0a4b92a4108e9449c507936f9f18
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--047d7b6d7c70a714da051ef1f24d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">>>=C2=A0<span style=3D"font-size:12.8000001907349px"=
>Let the market decide</span><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8000001907349=
px">How about Futarchy?</span><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><b=
r><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Peter Todd via=
bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a=
>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 =
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On F=
ri, Sep 04, 2015 at 01:13:18PM -0700, Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
> Thanks for your thoughts.<br>
><br>
> My proposal isn't perfect for sure. There's likely much better=
ways to do<br>
> it. But to be clear what I'm trying to solve is basically this:<br=
>
><br>
> Who makes high-level Bitcoin decisions? Miners, client devs, merchants=
, or<br>
> users? Let's set up a system where everyone has a say and clear ac=
ceptance<br>
> can be reached.<br>
<br>
</span>It depends on a case-by-case basis.<br>
<br>
E.g. for soft-forks miners can do what they want with little ability for<br=
>
other parties to have a say. For non-consensus-related standards - e.g.<br>
address formats - it's quite possible for a BIP to be "accepted&qu=
ot; even if<br>
only a small group of users use the standard. For hard-forks almost<br>
everyone is involved, though who can stop a fork isn't as well defined.=
<br>
<br>
IMO trying to "set up a system" in that kind of environment is si=
lly,<br>
and likely to be a bureaucratic waste of time. Let the market decide, as<br=
>
has happened previously. If you're idea isn't getting acceptance, d=
o a<br>
better job of convincing the people who need to adopt it that it is a<br>
good idea.<br>
<br>
No amount of words on paper will change the fact that we can't force<br=
>
people to run software they don't want to run. The entire formal part o=
f<br>
the BIP process is simply a convenience so we have clear, short, numbers<br=
>
that we can refer to when discussing ideas and standards. The rest of<br>
the process - e.g. what Adam Back and others have been referring to when<br=
>
attempting to dissuade Hearn and Andresen - is by definition always<br>
going to be a fuzzy, situation-specific, and generally undefined<br>
process.<br>
<br>
Or put another way, even if you did create your proposed process, the<br>
first time those committees "approved" a BIP that relevant stakeh=
olders<br>
disagreed with, you'd find out pretty quickly that "clear acceptan=
ce" of<br>
your 4% sample would fall apart the moment the other 96% realized what a<br=
>
tiny minority was intending to do. Particularly if it was one of the<br>
inhernet cases where the underlying math means a particular group - like<br=
>
miners - has the ability to override what another group wants out of<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888">Bitcoin.<br>
<br>
--<br>
'peter'[:-1]@<a href=3D"http://petertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">petertodd.org</a><br>
000000000000000010f9e95aff6454fedb9d0a4b92a4108e9449c507936f9f18<br>
</font></span><br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
--047d7b6d7c70a714da051ef1f24d--
|
