Author: Billy Tetrud 2022-04-28 05:18:06
Published on: 2022-04-28T05:18:06+00:00
The discussion revolves around how Bitcoin should govern itself and move away from appeals to authority towards something more amorphous. The speaker should not matter in consensus building, and weight should be carried by the logic of what is being said. NUMS points for ring signature purposes might not be useful for collecting signals if they become common. Non-experts and non-technical people have to rely on their ability to make a determination from partial knowledge and evaluate the trustworthiness and skill of those who have deeper knowledge than them. The truth gets out eventually, and annoying as the twitterati is, their opinions need to be given a bit of weight in measuring consensus. The proposal is polling that isn't programmatically connected to activation, and the intention is for developers to look at the polling results and make an educated analysis of it as far as how it should contribute to consensus gathering. Tooling would be essential here, and a mechanism for broader consensus measuring may lead more to have discussions and participate. It would be very useful information to see both who explicitly supports something, who explicitly is against something, and also who is paying attention but neutral.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T19:44:06.687889+00:00