Author: Jorge Timón 2015-10-05 13:24:54
Published on: 2015-10-05T13:24:54+00:00
The term "consensus" is used for consensus critical code, where different machines validate in the same way. However, using the term for people agreeing on consensus rules is confusing, so the term "uncontroversial" has been proposed instead. The definition of "uncontroversial" in this context is difficult to define, as it depends on the number of users who disagree with a proposal. The fact that there are at least three proposals for a blocksize increase, and that development progress has slowed down during months of discussion, suggests that none of the current proposals are uncontroversial. BIP65 is believed to be uncontroversial since no reasonable objections have been raised about the feature itself, despite complaints about its softfork deployment mechanism. BIP16, BIP30, and BIP66 were all potentially uncontroversial, except for some preference for hardforks over softforks. A new category could be created in BIP99 if necessary. The definition of "uncontroversial" is vague, and a more formal definition could be proposed. However, the definition should not allow any individual to block everything without reasonable arguments. Softforks have great advantages in many cases, but BIP99 should be uncontroversial overall. Feedback and improvements are welcome before it is finalized.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T23:10:58.136557+00:00