Re: [bitcoin-dev] Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on lockinontimeout (LOT)

2021-02-23 Thread Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:10:34PM -0800, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Not responding to anyone in particular, but it strikes me that one can think > about the case where a small minority (let's say H = 20%?) of nodes I don't think that's a good way to try to look at things -- number of nodes h

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on lockinontimeout (LOT)

2021-02-23 Thread Ben Woosley via bitcoin-dev
Relative to your arguments, Keagan and Jeremy, and speaking in favor of LOT=false, from my limited perspective: > As Jeremy points out, the LOT=true possibility always exists here, and we have multiple high profile people saying they will be running that regardless of how things turn out. It seems

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on lockinontimeout (LOT)

2021-02-23 Thread Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev
I wanted to follow up on what Jeremy and others are saying regards finding consensus on LOT. I've seen a few other opinions saying that finding consensus on the LOT value is far more important than what the LOT value actually is. This makes sense because if 100% of economic activity is running the