From: John Rand <johnqrand@gmail•com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] activation mechanism considerations
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 23:02:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJXtxW=Rix7Q-ra=CADsB00r13pr5DC_76QMGcYrt74FxAWEbQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1412 bytes --]
Consensus is important for both taproot and separately for the activation
mechanism. There are more soft-forks that Bitcoin will need, so it is
important to achieve positive progress on the activation topic also, not
get impatient and rush something ill-considered. Not all future soft-forks
maybe as widely supported as taproot, and yet it could become existentially
critical that Bitcoin prevails in achieving a future upgrade in dramatic
circumstances, even against powerful interests counter to Bitcoin user and
investors interests. We should treat the activation topic in a considered
way and with decorum, provide tight non-emotive reasoning devoid of
frustration and impatience. This is a low drama and convenient time to
incrementally improve activation. People have varied views about the
deciding factor, or even which factors resulted in segwit activating after
BIP 141 failed using BIP 9. We do not have to solve everything in one
step, incremental improvement is good, for complex unintuitive topics, to
learn as we go - and it should not be hard to do less badly than what
transpired leading up to BIP 148 and BIP 91. Failure to upgrade if
permanent, or demoralizing to protocol researchers could be a systemic risk
in itself as there are more upgrades Bitcoin will need. We are not Ents
but we should use our collective ingenuity to find an incremental
improvement for activation.
John R
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1477 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2021-03-03 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-03 23:02 John Rand [this message]
2021-03-04 9:25 ` Melvin Carvalho
2021-03-04 16:00 ` Steve Lee
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='CAJXtxW=Rix7Q-ra=CADsB00r13pr5DC_76QMGcYrt74FxAWEbQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=johnqrand@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.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