From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>
To: eric@voskuil•org
Cc: 'Bitcoin Protocol Discussion' <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] CTV BIP review
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 22:09:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202201182209.46044.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <02cc01d80cb7$1339c050$39ad40f0$@voskuil.org>
On Tuesday 18 January 2022 22:02:24 eric@voskuil•org wrote:
> The only material distinction between BIP9 and BIP8 is that the latter may
> activate without signaled support of hash power enforcement.
>
> As unenforced soft forks are not "backward compatible" they produce a chain
> split.
Enforcement of the Bitcoin consensus protocol is by users, not miners.
Softforks never produce a chain split. Miners can, and might try to do it to
cause disruption in retaliation, but the softfork itself does not.
> It was for this reason alone that BIP8 never gained sufficient
> support.
BIP 8 in fact achieved consensus for Taproot activation.
> This is one of the most misleading statements I've seen here. It's not
> technically a lie, because it states what "should" happen. But it is
> clearly intended to lead people to believe that BIP8 was actually used
> ("again") - it was not. ST was some technical tweaks to BIP9.
BIP 8 was used to activate Taproot.
> The outright deception around this one topic has led to significant
> unnecessary conflict in the community. Make your argument, but make it
> honestly.
You are the one attempting to deceive here.
Luke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-18 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-18 21:19 Luke Dashjr
2022-01-18 22:02 ` eric
2022-01-18 22:09 ` Luke Dashjr [this message]
2022-01-18 23:00 ` eric
2022-01-19 12:02 ` Michael Folkson
2022-01-20 15:23 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-01-20 22:03 ` eric
2022-01-21 17:36 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-01-18 23:54 ` Jeremy
2022-01-19 0:37 ` Alex Schoof
2022-01-20 18:38 ` Anthony Towns
2022-01-18 22:20 Prayank
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202201182209.46044.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=eric@voskuil$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox