From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A89B65AA for ; Fri, 26 May 2017 18:48:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx-out01.mykolab.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.1]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4530F3 for ; Fri, 26 May 2017 18:48:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com X-Spam-Score: -2.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx03.mykolab.com (mx03.mykolab.com [10.20.7.101]) by mx-out01.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B5AB615FD; Fri, 26 May 2017 20:48:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Tom Zander To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Jacob Eliosoff Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 20:48:32 +0200 Message-ID: <2134289.AMSES3raTP@strawberry> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 26 May 2017 18:52:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Barry Silbert segwit agreement X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 18:48:38 -0000 On Friday, 26 May 2017 19:47:11 CEST Jacob Eliosoff via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Forgive me if this is a dumb question. Sorry for picking your email. I understand people want something different for the agreement, I know I do= =20 too. We have a specific agreement on the table, signed by a huge subsection of t= he=20 industry. Maybe the time for changing things is not to be *after* the signatures are= =20 set. I know I=E2=80=99d change some detials. But do we really want to go th= rough=20 another conference where all the important people are present to agree on a= =20 compromise? Or can we use the one we have? The compromise is pretty simple; https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-13352= 1fe9a77 * Activate Segregated Witness at an 80% threshold, signaling at bit 4 * Activate a 2 MB hard fork within six months =2D-=20 Tom Zander Blog: https://zander.github.io Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel