From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <staf@stafverhaegen.be>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EB75727
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 11 Feb 2017 15:57:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from lvps83-169-4-30.dedicated.hosteurope.de
	(lvps83-169-4-30.dedicated.hosteurope.de [83.169.4.30])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AD0C224
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 11 Feb 2017 15:57:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 21604 invoked from network); 11 Feb 2017 16:57:53 +0100
Received: from unknown (HELO hpdc7800) (10.0.0.1)
	by 10.0.0.2 with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 11 Feb 2017 16:57:50 +0100
Message-ID: <1486828666.21100.115.camel@stafverhaegen.be>
From: Staf Verhaegen <staf@stafverhaegen.be>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 16:57:46 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAAcC9yuzgKWGXxbZLM+21pvRZmYV+nDAMBWMpZXCg6RUYHXRWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGCNRJqNg9-aYG62OxTz5RJyx+JJkx-kt2odooZWs92f5teZiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<201702030024.10232.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAGLBAhdzPOC6MppMyuL6SwnoY_D829ZRs78pTF47k3rnHPjE1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMBsKS9Jmah6jc-pYNNOmJSJS+mHSJ9PchWnQ=BixX0C-hg4ig@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGCNRJpgvoyjKR8RcsOacWD0YboVK+enFPEV+heXFZp9Svau_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAcC9yuzgKWGXxbZLM+21pvRZmYV+nDAMBWMpZXCg6RUYHXRWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-kb6lcioZKYv5Bsja0Vns"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 (3.12.11-22.el7) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR
	autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 16:49:58 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Community Consensus Voting System
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 15:57:55 -0000


--=-kb6lcioZKYv5Bsja0Vns
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev schreef op vr 03-02-2017 om 16:57 [-0800]:
> Personally I think once the blocksize arguments are solved, there will
> be no more contentious changes for this voting system to deal with.
> What other contentious issues have come up in the past 3 years or so
> that wasn't blocksize/scaling related? Do other protocols like TCP/IP
> and the HTTP protocol have developers arguing every day over issues no
> one can agree on?

Yes, DRM for example.
Staf.


--=-kb6lcioZKYv5Bsja0Vns
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EABEIAAYFAlifNH4ACgkQWIjyN0LdGqzTFwEArSWEDCqONMulEDjMmCNtFcny
62PbQaAWTDAeAZHtn68A/3R4hB3x4D59UD4jU+jszp2iqZZA6maAk8gMADRSO0cR
=L5f7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-kb6lcioZKYv5Bsja0Vns--