- it occurs to me that the real problem we have isn't whether miners lead or users lead. we know that users lead, we just need miners to be "ready" and have time to upgrade their software
- in the case of "evil" forks, i also don't need or want miners to "defend" bitcoin... (if bitcoin is so broken that a bad fork gets past all of the users, the miners have lost their purpose, so that is a fallacy of reification and should be ignored)
- we cannot measure user consensus in any systematic way, or else we resort to gaming the system or centralization
- wallet votes (sign a message signalling... ), can cause centralization pressures
- node signals (node published signal) will be sybil attacked
- eyeballs... (lol)
- can we all agree that this verbal and social wrangling and chest pounding seems, right now, to remain the best system of achieving consensus? or can we do better?