📅 Original date posted:2015-08-18
📝 Original message:As an aside, combining reward halving with block size limit doubling would have probably been a good idea :)
> On Aug 18, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> -> You need to take into account the reward halving, likely to be in 3Q2016. Forks and reward halving at the same time would possibly be a bad combination.
>
> -> The original proposed date for the fork was December 2015. It was pushed back to January as December is a busy period for a lot of people and businesses. Likewise, June is a busy period for people. July / August is a good period as it is quiet because people go on holiday. A window of 2 months during holiday periods is better than starting in June. January 2016 is better, mainly because of the excessive reward halving chatter likely to be going on..
>
> ..
> Proposal (parameters in ** are my recommendations but negotiable):
>
> 1. Today, we all agree that some kind of block size hardfork will happen on t1=*1 June 2016*
>
> 2. If no other consensus could be reached before t2=*1 Feb 2016*, we will adopt the backup plan
>
> 3. The backup plan is: t3=*30 days* after m=*80%* of miner approval, but not before t1=*1 June 2016*, the block size is increased to s=*1.5MB*
>
> 4. If the backup plan is adopted, we all agree that a better solution should be found before t4=*31 Dec 2017*.
> ..
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150818/a9a42330/attachment-0001.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150818/a9a42330/attachment-0001.sig>;
Eric Lombrozo [ARCHIVE] /
npub1az…t2krq
2023-06-07 17:36:45
in reply to nevent1q…6y3a
Author Public Key
npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krqPublished at
2023-06-07 17:36:45Event JSON
{
"id": "82cd1c5191cee7185db1044bfdfb846554ced53d72a1e21950a59c236682b19f",
"pubkey": "e899768d254f3537af7e26455968583632d0ab0bd4c780445eacfa087ac80d8f",
"created_at": 1686159405,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"015c5ac0a5b1780b314fc0de46b00e614fb9247d46dfb61637d3d94fa76f544c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"856a2ae078c21c595516e89c7ccecf2b7e6a3bafa626f268c0dc31048c6cacd2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"7d32854c9e442b53f36bfc2759c2b0fe2808c32770662bac6a548f04346c503d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-18\n📝 Original message:As an aside, combining reward halving with block size limit doubling would have probably been a good idea :)\n\n\u003e On Aug 18, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e -\u003e You need to take into account the reward halving, likely to be in 3Q2016. Forks and reward halving at the same time would possibly be a bad combination.\n\u003e \n\u003e -\u003e The original proposed date for the fork was December 2015. It was pushed back to January as December is a busy period for a lot of people and businesses. Likewise, June is a busy period for people. July / August is a good period as it is quiet because people go on holiday. A window of 2 months during holiday periods is better than starting in June. January 2016 is better, mainly because of the excessive reward halving chatter likely to be going on..\n\u003e \n\u003e ..\n\u003e Proposal (parameters in ** are my recommendations but negotiable):\n\u003e \n\u003e 1. Today, we all agree that some kind of block size hardfork will happen on t1=*1 June 2016*\n\u003e \n\u003e 2. If no other consensus could be reached before t2=*1 Feb 2016*, we will adopt the backup plan\n\u003e \n\u003e 3. The backup plan is: t3=*30 days* after m=*80%* of miner approval, but not before t1=*1 June 2016*, the block size is increased to s=*1.5MB*\n\u003e \n\u003e 4. If the backup plan is adopted, we all agree that a better solution should be found before t4=*31 Dec 2017*.\n\u003e ..\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150818/a9a42330/attachment-0001.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 842 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150818/a9a42330/attachment-0001.sig\u003e",
"sig": "3ec3e039db5e19ed6248a0e377a4a6a9aa13c496345cbb481f43ce45c18952cbf85d37bf57437c02795ef01b22cd1555d8530d1bfff4415517fa99eb355e7a07"
}