Difference between revisions of "Talk:Block size limit controversy"

From Bitcoin Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "I think the article needs a revision from the ground up since I think there is consensus that the limit should be increased, it is just unclear when to do that and by how much...")
 
(Reply)
Line 1: Line 1:
I think the article needs a revision from the ground up since I think there is consensus that the limit should be increased, it is just unclear when to do that and by how much. Also, the "A hard fork requires waiting for sufficient consensus." argument is actually very unclear because there is no measure of consensus short of the longest blockchain. Bitcoin core dev consensus is arbitrary and also represents a centralisation.
+
I think the article needs a revision from the ground up since I think there is consensus that the limit should be increased, it is just unclear when to do that and by how much. Also, the "A hard fork requires waiting for sufficient consensus." argument is actually very unclear because there is no measure of consensus short of the longest blockchain. Bitcoin core dev consensus is arbitrary and also represents a centralisation. ---Unsigned comment by [[User:Chaosgrid]]
 +
 
 +
: (1) I agree there is widespread consensus that the limit should eventually be increased.  (2) I don't think the inability to independently measure consensus is a barrier to determining when a proposal does or does not have consensus.  When there are several important members of our community objecting to a proposal, it is safe to say that consensus has not been obtained.  ---[[User:Harding|Harding]] ([[User talk:Harding|talk]]) 23:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:26, 10 August 2015

I think the article needs a revision from the ground up since I think there is consensus that the limit should be increased, it is just unclear when to do that and by how much. Also, the "A hard fork requires waiting for sufficient consensus." argument is actually very unclear because there is no measure of consensus short of the longest blockchain. Bitcoin core dev consensus is arbitrary and also represents a centralisation. ---Unsigned comment by User:Chaosgrid

(1) I agree there is widespread consensus that the limit should eventually be increased. (2) I don't think the inability to independently measure consensus is a barrier to determining when a proposal does or does not have consensus. When there are several important members of our community objecting to a proposal, it is safe to say that consensus has not been obtained. ---Harding (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC)