📅 Original date posted:2015-06-12
📝 Original message:For the purposes of finding the median, halve < same < double. It will only
change if a majority of non-apathetic votes are for halve or a majority of
non-apathetic votes are for double.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>
wrote:
> On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:44 pm, Peter Todd wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:36:31PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > > On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:34 pm, Peter Todd wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:22:36PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > > > > Why should miners only be able to vote for "double the limit" or
> "halve" the limit? If you're going to use bits, I think you need to use two
> bits:
> > > > >
> > > > > 0 0 = no preference ("wildcard" vote)
> > > > > 0 1 = vote for the limit to remain the same
> > > > > 1 0 = vote for the limit to be halved
> > > > > 1 1 = vote for the limit to be doubled
> > > > >
> > > > > User transactions would follow the same usage. In particular, a
> user vote of "0 0" (no preference) could be included in a block casting any
> vote, but a block voting "0 0" (no preference) could only contain
> transactions voting "0 0" as well.
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like a good encoding to me. Taking the median of the three
> > > > options, and throwing away "don't care" votes entirely, makes sense.
> > >
> > > I hope you mean the *plurality* of the three options after throwing
> away the "don't cares," not the *median*.
> >
> > Median ensures that voting "no change" is meaningful. If "double" + "no
> > change" = 66%-1, you'd expect the result to be "no change", not "halve""
> > With a plurality vote you'd end up with a halving that was supported by
> > a minority.
>
> Never mind. I think I've figured out what you're getting at, and you're
> right. We wouldn't want "halve" to win on a plurality just because the
> remaining majority of the vote was split between double and
> remain-the-same. Good catch. :)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--
J. Aaron Gustafson
Cornell University '16 | Computer Science, Engineering | Mathematics, Arts
& Sciences
Vice President, Kappa Delta Rho
jag426 at cornell.edu | Ithaca, New York
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150612/5da1e54c/attachment.html>;
Aaron Gustafson [ARCHIVE] /
npub1rr…rt399
2023-06-07 15:37:30
in reply to nevent1q…e4hj
Author Public Key
npub1rrxhl3h0rrxz0kad4mjjtyn8d836l7e0jvneqfn6rjkzwnsd7uksqrt399Published at
2023-06-07 15:37:30Event JSON
{
"id": "e269e6bd4fec320e87567ffd59c09532d079e48d517297881913b6c65d8e6649",
"pubkey": "18cd7fc6ef18cc27dbadaee525926769e3affb2f932790267a1cac274e0df72d",
"created_at": 1686152250,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8a807127e1ae5b585bcc8f3578413a7d3eb1bd30e75c19cd4a3a0a256adcb61c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ff975ca6be34d5502935743e76fd48ed22b52f946350e7b3896fc6b311088e95",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f00d0858b09287e941ccbc491567cc70bdbc62d714628b167c1b76e7fef04d91"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-12\n📝 Original message:For the purposes of finding the median, halve \u003c same \u003c double. It will only\nchange if a majority of non-apathetic votes are for halve or a majority of\nnon-apathetic votes are for double.\n\nOn Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Matt Whitlock \u003cbip at mattwhitlock.name\u003e\nwrote:\n\n\u003e On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:44 pm, Peter Todd wrote:\n\u003e \u003e On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:36:31PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:34 pm, Peter Todd wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:22:36PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e Why should miners only be able to vote for \"double the limit\" or\n\u003e \"halve\" the limit? If you're going to use bits, I think you need to use two\n\u003e bits:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e 0 0 = no preference (\"wildcard\" vote)\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e 0 1 = vote for the limit to remain the same\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e 1 0 = vote for the limit to be halved\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e 1 1 = vote for the limit to be doubled\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e User transactions would follow the same usage. In particular, a\n\u003e user vote of \"0 0\" (no preference) could be included in a block casting any\n\u003e vote, but a block voting \"0 0\" (no preference) could only contain\n\u003e transactions voting \"0 0\" as well.\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e Sounds like a good encoding to me. Taking the median of the three\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e options, and throwing away \"don't care\" votes entirely, makes sense.\n\u003e \u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e \u003e I hope you mean the *plurality* of the three options after throwing\n\u003e away the \"don't cares,\" not the *median*.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Median ensures that voting \"no change\" is meaningful. If \"double\" + \"no\n\u003e \u003e change\" = 66%-1, you'd expect the result to be \"no change\", not \"halve\"\"\n\u003e \u003e With a plurality vote you'd end up with a halving that was supported by\n\u003e \u003e a minority.\n\u003e\n\u003e Never mind. I think I've figured out what you're getting at, and you're\n\u003e right. We wouldn't want \"halve\" to win on a plurality just because the\n\u003e remaining majority of the vote was split between double and\n\u003e remain-the-same. Good catch. :)\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\n\n\n\n-- \nJ. Aaron Gustafson\nCornell University '16 | Computer Science, Engineering | Mathematics, Arts\n\u0026 Sciences\nVice President, Kappa Delta Rho\njag426 at cornell.edu | Ithaca, New York\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150612/5da1e54c/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "2d848e534637de3d0f78c11a5fd4accb5b6ee9bff78387f1f09a748721da8762d7c1395c75873914605688d64206d84e8bdb0df5617616a6891dcf0739729f9c"
}