Author: Billy Tetrud 2022-04-28 16:09:36
Published on: 2022-04-28T16:09:36+00:00
The discussion centers around the issue of consensus building in Bitcoin governance. With a growing number of stakeholders who have more economic influence on the network than the developer community, there is a need for a way to decide when it is appropriate to activate a consensus change in Bitcoin. The group proposes that the weight of any person or group's say should depend on their total future or near-term economic influence on the network. Four primary constituencies are identified - holders, transactors, miners, and developers - and a proposal is made using a formula to determine their representation.However, opinions on the value held by each constituency are subjective, so there is a confidence range on how much representation they should have. It is suggested that coin-weighted polling, transaction signaling, miner signaling, and developer consensus reviews could be used to measure support. While these methods may leave room for doubt, it is believed that understanding their limitations makes them less gameable. The group hopes to find a logical solution to the issue that is defendable and encodable into the social fabric of Bitcoin, rather than arguing until only one opinion remains standing.Keagan suggests moving away from appeals to authority towards something more amorphous and difficult to control. He proposes using NUMS points for ring signature purposes. Erik raises concerns about people who don't know there is a vote going on and how non-experts can have a say when they don't understand the relevant issues. He proposes thinking about this in terms of preferences and representation rather than coming up with the best technical solution all the time, as value is subjective.The truth eventually gets out, and those with deep knowledge will convince those who don't. However, non-technical people have to rely on social signals, and the opinions of nontechnical people should not be the basis of making technical decisions. Instead, clear explanations of changes proposed should be given to ensure that a certain level of comfort diffuses into the social circles of people who care about Bitcoin but don't understand it at a technical enough level to participate in technical decision making. Tooling would be essential in garnering meaningful data in polling.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T19:47:04.316560+00:00