Author: Chris Riley 2022-04-27 14:01:57
Published on: 2022-04-27T14:01:57+00:00
A proposal has been suggested by Keagan McClelland to measure user support for proposed soft-fork changes through a mechanism that would allow transactions to signal upgrades. The proposal involves mapping free bits in the version field of a transaction to signaling bits in the block header. This would give users sybil-resistant influence over miner decisions, which could pressure miners to act on their behalf. Other potential tweaks to the design include a notion of negative signaling and making miner signaling congruent with over X% of transactions.The proposal has garnered some anticipated objections, such as wealth being able to make consensus decisions. However, it is seen as an improvement over the current status quo where publicly influential people decide consensus. The biggest question posed to the forum is whether such a scheme affords us a better view into consensus than we have today, whether it can be gamed to give us a worse view into consensus, and what is the right thing to measure assuming we could measure consensus more accurately.The context is an email thread from the bitcoin-dev mailing list hosted by the Linux Foundation. The thread contains multiple messages, including a message from Bryan who shares a link to his Twitter profile. The thread also includes information about how to join the mailing list and manage subscriptions. However, there is an HTML attachment that has been scrubbed and no further details are provided about it.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T19:44:45.351217+00:00