Author: Sergio Demian Lerner 2015-10-05 15:56:33
Published on: 2015-10-05T15:56:33+00:00
The discussion regarding technicalities of a soft/hard fork in Bitcoin has been taking place without realizing that Mike Hearn's intention was to criticize the informal governance model of Bitcoin Core development. The discussion has nothing to do with technical arguments, and Mike has strategically pushed the discussion to a dead-end where the group either ignores him or responds to his technical objections one after the other, bringing the project to a standstill. If the group moves forward with the change without addressing Mike's objections, then the "uncontroversial" criteria is violated, and credibility is lost. Therefore, a new governance model would be required for which the change is within the established rules. Sergio suggests that having a more formal decision-making process may not be too bad for Bitcoin, and it can actually be good.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T23:50:30.833220+00:00