📅 Original date posted:2017-05-26
📝 Original message:On Friday, 26 May 2017 19:47:11 CEST Jacob Eliosoff via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Forgive me if this is a dumb question.
Sorry for picking your email.
I understand people want something different for the agreement, I know I do
too.
We have a specific agreement on the table, signed by a huge subsection of the
industry.
Maybe the time for changing things is not to be *after* the signatures are
set. I know I’d change some detials. But do we really want to go through
another conference where all the important people are present to agree on a
compromise? Or can we use the one we have?
The compromise is pretty simple;
https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77
* Activate Segregated Witness at an 80% threshold, signaling at bit 4
* Activate a 2 MB hard fork within six months
--
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
Tom Zander [ARCHIVE] /
npub1mj…dxnq7
2023-06-07 18:01:23
in reply to nevent1q…ejap
Author Public Key
npub1mju50kqcm07heu967fkq6h4kq666xgekc4yrldf7q52xx9vr8jnsrdxnq7Published at
2023-06-07 18:01:23Event JSON
{
"id": "ff5c2be26565f3285065519ad1351c561251dfe27ded3389ecf38fbb12e5cb69",
"pubkey": "dcb947d818dbfd7cf0baf26c0d5eb606b5a32336c5483fb53e05146315833ca7",
"created_at": 1686160883,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5f4e5578a00516f73144a00c0c15e1afca8ff6c2e2a719034eb27cdcba62a8d3",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"084b59851b50e853fdad97be5115e46e10b7f560d65c5d958900f864c66878d9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"dfc3b86290d962b72921536f7e3b66c03742b85abc914447a90507cc27ff8a4b"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-05-26\n📝 Original message:On Friday, 26 May 2017 19:47:11 CEST Jacob Eliosoff via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Forgive me if this is a dumb question.\n\nSorry for picking your email.\n\nI understand people want something different for the agreement, I know I do \ntoo.\nWe have a specific agreement on the table, signed by a huge subsection of the \nindustry.\n\nMaybe the time for changing things is not to be *after* the signatures are \nset. I know I’d change some detials. But do we really want to go through \nanother conference where all the important people are present to agree on a \ncompromise? Or can we use the one we have?\n\nThe compromise is pretty simple;\nhttps://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77\n\n* Activate Segregated Witness at an 80% threshold, signaling at bit 4\n* Activate a 2 MB hard fork within six months\n\n-- \nTom Zander\nBlog: https://zander.github.io\nVlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel",
"sig": "ed69674b8b9cfbd75a59247e9e2118e71133bd6fd6691062dd00c4b2880be23327e2506bb6c2b9a5a11dd8735f1343d43c7c2893e94fb786dd325cefe3743926"
}