Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Exploring alternative activation mechanisms: decreasing threshold

From: Ryan Grant <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2021 14:06:42 +0000

On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 5:55 PM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> This has the same problems BIP149 did: since there is no signalling, it is
> ambiguous whether the softfork has activated at all.

You only need to see one block in the heaviest valid chain to dissolve
that ambiguity.  There are a lot of volunteers in this space who would
(collectively) commit a few block's worth of hashrate, to know.

> Additionally, it loses the flexibility of BIP 8 to, after the initial
> deployment, move the timeoutheight sooner.

It doesn't interfere with concurrent UASFs using any combination of
timeoutheights.