📅 Original date posted:2015-06-23
📝 Original message:> Consensus is that this process is too painful to go through once a year. I
> agree.
>
> If you disagree and would like to see a Blocksize Council meet once a year
> to issue a decree on what the maximum block size shall be for the next
> year, then propose a process for who gets to sit on the Council and how
> their decrees are enforced.....
We could just as well say that the increases continue for 20 years, or
until there is concensus to schedule a soft-fork to prevent further
increase - whichever comes first. That is the case already, of
course, since there is no way to prevent a modest supermajority of
miners from pushing through a soft-fork. But explicitly accepting the
possibility that the community might choose to cut the process short
might make the BIP more palatable to some.
It is also the reality: halting the blocksize increase before it hits
the final 8GB limit is relatively easy, compared to the task of
setting it in motion, so it does no real harm to set the "20 years"
figure at the upper range of what we think is reasonable - even though
under other circumstances one would probably say that extrapolating
exponentials that far out would be foolhardy...
roy
Roy Badami [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tr…0f95j
2023-06-07 15:39:48
in reply to nevent1q…5qw7
Author Public Key
npub1trckpcxmceskq4cykxgwxm63n8ugrjrpu5mk83c90e4upsf7d9gqf0f95jPublished at
2023-06-07 15:39:48Event JSON
{
"id": "764be3f4a1731c05a5fa46b789d0a7ae4aa8fe1e36b522a245fb091bc3922434",
"pubkey": "58f160e0dbc661605704b190e36f5199f881c861e53763c7057e6bc0c13e6950",
"created_at": 1686152388,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1936c15d372dc9e8a0eaf645dcff207375e90675dbebfadcf82370abc654737d",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ae61dd328420233bf562be5028cceabf054fa5d39649e9b6cc415b823d1b1c03",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1b29d94ee81e1ee0479f1db4bc4ac887407bd470a0d7060e76f8ab27fdd57e50"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-23\n📝 Original message:\u003e Consensus is that this process is too painful to go through once a year. I\n\u003e agree.\n\u003e \n\u003e If you disagree and would like to see a Blocksize Council meet once a year\n\u003e to issue a decree on what the maximum block size shall be for the next\n\u003e year, then propose a process for who gets to sit on the Council and how\n\u003e their decrees are enforced.....\n\nWe could just as well say that the increases continue for 20 years, or\nuntil there is concensus to schedule a soft-fork to prevent further\nincrease - whichever comes first. That is the case already, of\ncourse, since there is no way to prevent a modest supermajority of\nminers from pushing through a soft-fork. But explicitly accepting the\npossibility that the community might choose to cut the process short\nmight make the BIP more palatable to some.\n\nIt is also the reality: halting the blocksize increase before it hits\nthe final 8GB limit is relatively easy, compared to the task of\nsetting it in motion, so it does no real harm to set the \"20 years\"\nfigure at the upper range of what we think is reasonable - even though\nunder other circumstances one would probably say that extrapolating\nexponentials that far out would be foolhardy...\n\nroy",
"sig": "051914f41e065f5c12401cdd8b527a96326308b9eeaaaceda93a9dcdf05247d370b4523826d5538a98cf03072317cd580862acdf8898085f8900f2f1765afb16"
}