Author: NxtChg 2015-07-01 08:45:12
Published on: 2015-07-01T08:45:12+00:00
The author considers the possibility of building an effective Bitcoin governance and concludes that it is not plausible. Instead, they propose that Core and XT continue to co-exist in parallel, acting as a kind of two-party system with different people, structures, processes, and political standings, keeping each other in check. The sides' respective power will be determined by the number of nodes running and people/businesses on board. They will have to negotiate any significant change at the risk of yet another full fork. The author believes this is a step towards decentralization, proving that Bitcoin is indeed a decentralized system, and that the minority cannot impose its will.The author argues that if the sides agree now, it would be a bad thing because it would mean kicking the governance problem down the road. Instead, they propose that both sides should start thinking of themselves as opposition parties, with people and businesses ultimately deciding through a Yes/No vote on proposed changes. This new reality requires an improved voting mechanism for Bitcoin, which could include adding something like 8-byte votes into blocks, with miners serving as 'hubs,' collecting all the noise and chatter and casting it into a vote.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T01:53:39.752227+00:00