Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Thanks for your comments Luke. > Are you saying your proposal is intentionally not intended to reflect the reality? That's right. I want to be able to include more voices and be able to get a clearer idea of acceptance then the process currently has available. This process should work alongside

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Wanted to throw up here some feedback I got off-list. Source: http://bitco.in/forum/threads/bitcoinxt-dispute-resolution-etc.36/#post-602 [1] > Interesting. > > I like your idea that people can form representational groups which then > collectively votes ("committees"). Basically an in

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Named Bitcoin Addresses

What's some more information about the "memorizing and sharing" use case? In most cases if you wanted someone to send you money you'd send them a payment request via email (or just send them your address). There's a bunch of solutions to your problem listed here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/bl

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Thanks for your response BTC Drak, I will attempt to summarize your points and respond to them: * Some BIPs are not consensus critical -- True, see my response to Luke * BIPs do not imply usage -- This I covered in my paper. * Acceptance can be defined by actual use -- That's one way of doing it

[bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Realistic Acceptance Process

Mediawiki formatted documented: https://gist.github.com/andychase/dadbfbb145de934d8e1c —— Title: BIP Realistic Acceptance Process Author: Andy Chase Status: Draft Type: Process Created: 2015-09-06 Abstract The current process for accepting a BIP is not clearly d

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

> Normally allocation comes after about 2 weeks or so, not 2 days! > On 5 Sep 2015 10:20 pm, "Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev" < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Okay for sure yeah writing another proposal that reflects the current >> state o

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Okay for sure yeah writing another proposal that reflects the current state of affairs as people see it might provide some interesting perspective on this proposal. I would welcome that. Greg: With no other direct comments appearing to be inbound I'd like to move forward with this one and get a nu

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Luke Dashjr wrote: > On Friday, September 04, 2015 8:13:18 PM Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Who makes high-level Bitcoin decisions? Miners, client devs, merchants, > or > > users? Let's set up a system where everyone has a say and clear > acceptance > > ca

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

icting common sense from the proceedings. > Much of the debates around consensus building seem to negate the > importance of common sense and the simple fact that "it's obvious when > you see it". > > I'm sure there can be improvements, but for me personally, I nee

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 100 specification

The 32Mb limit is here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/serialize.h#L25 It's to keep the message size small enough that messages can be serialized in memory. Jeff if you decide to lift the 32MB limit (you really should, unless your plan is to potentially hard force another Bloc

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

and empowered Cons: * How to prove and prevent manipulation? * Only motivated people will contribute. Motivated people may be motivated for bad reasons. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Andy Chase via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

ow true acceptance to be identified in a clearer way. If people don't follow the "rules" then the system simply won't work, this is mentioned in the last section. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Luke Dashjr wrote: > On Friday, September 04, 2015 12:30:50 AM Andy Chase via bitco

[bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process

Here’s a BIP. I wrote the BIP mostly to stir the pot on ideas of governance, but I’m moderately serious about it. This is set in Markdown for readability, but here’s the BIP-0001 Medawiki version: https://gist.github.com/andychase/dddb83c294295879308b

[bitcoin-dev] BIP/Motivation and deployment of consensus rule changes ([soft/hard]forks)

As I understand Github is not to be used for the high-level discussion of a draft BIP so I will post my thoughts here (is this specified somewhere? Can we specify this in BIP-0001?). - I have some concerns about the structure and the wording of this proposal. I think both the structure and t