From: Mustafa Al-Bassam <mus@musalbas•com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>, bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 promotion to Final
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 14:02:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E17E67.9040508@musalbas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201603100053.43822.luke@dashjr.org>
On 10/03/16 00:53, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 12:29:16 AM Mustafa Al-Bassam wrote:
>>> the soft-fork does not become Final for as long as such a hard-fork
>>> has potentially-majority support, or at most three months.
>> This wording is awkward. What is "potentially-majority"?
> A group that is large enough that it may constitute a majority.
> How can I reword this better/clearer?
"potentially has majority support"?
>
>>> A hard-fork BIP requires adoption from the entire Bitcoin economy,
>>> particularly including those selling desirable goods and services in
>>> exchange for bitcoin payments, as well as Bitcoin holders who wish to
>>> spend or would spend their bitcoins (including selling for other
>>> currencies) differently in the event of such a hard-fork.
>> What if one shop owner, for example, out of thousands, doesn't adapt the
>> hard-fork? It is expected, and should perhaps be encouraged, for a small
>> minority to not accept a hard fork, but by the wording of the BIP
>> ("entire Bitcoin economy"), one shop owner can veto a hard-fork.
> It's not the hard-fork they can veto (in this context, anyway), but the
> progression of the BIP Status field. However, one shop cannot operate in a
> vacuum: if they are indeed alone, they will soon find themselves no longer
> selling in exchange for bitcoin payments, as nobody else would exist willing
> to use the previous blockchain to pay them. If they are no longer selling,
> they cease to meet the criteria here enabling their veto.
I think in general this sounds like a good definition for a hard-fork
becoming active. But I can envision a situation where someone will try
to be annoying about it and point to one instance of one buyer and one
seller using the blockchain to buy and sell from each other, or set one up.
> Luke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-10 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-08 19:04 Luke Dashjr
2016-03-10 0:36 ` Mustafa Al-Bassam
2016-03-10 15:46 ` Jorge Timón
[not found] ` <56E0BFDC.5070604@musalbas.com>
[not found] ` <201603100053.43822.luke@dashjr.org>
2016-03-10 14:02 ` Mustafa Al-Bassam [this message]
2016-03-10 15:59 ` Jorge Timón
2016-03-10 16:28 ` Mustafa Al-Bassam
2016-03-10 16:33 ` Mustafa Al-Bassam
2016-03-10 18:30 ` Jorge Timón
2016-03-10 16:43 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-03-16 20:43 ` Btc Drak
2016-03-16 22:24 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-03-18 9:42 ` Btc Drak
2016-03-18 19:34 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-03-18 22:52 ` David A. Harding
2016-03-18 11:59 ` Tom
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=56E17E67.9040508@musalbas.com \
--to=mus@musalbas$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=luke@dashjr$(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