Author: Jorge Timón 2015-08-19 17:28:38
Published on: 2015-08-19T17:28:38+00:00
In a conversation on bitcoin-dev, Adam Back used the term "miner vote" in reference to hard forks, which prompted a response from another user. The user disagreed with the term "miner vote," stating that miners shouldn't have more power than other users. Instead, they suggested using the term "miner upgrade confirmation" and recommended using 95% for both uncontroversial softforks and hardforks. They also noted that the mechanism should not be a "miners' democracy/oligopoly." For a Schism hardfork, BIP99 doesn't recommend using miner confirmation/vote at all. The user emphasized the importance of focusing on "how to do hardforks in general" rather than solely focusing on how to make a blocksize hardfork.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T19:50:21.782542+00:00