Quote from: DooMAD on September 21, 2015, 08:46:56 AM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on September 21, 2015, 02:01:59 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 20, 2015, 09:15:50 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on September 20, 2015, 06:17:50 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 20, 2015, 09:59:46 AM

As for BIP101, I honestly don't think it was the catastrophic, apocalyptic doomsday scenario you portray it to be.

Again (actual real life head shake), who's the extremist?

Never said it, or anything like it. Total exaggeration of my actual position.

Fine, I'm embellishing, but your position was still that you disagree with it, ergo it cannot be. With a few tweaks and a less aggressive increase, this discussion could have been resolved by now.

So.... you completely invented my position for your own purposes, and somehow your point still stands? What?

Thought it was clear. Rather than working with the community to try to improve the proposal, you joined in with the group hellbent on burying it. Not constructive.

Quote from: Carlton Banks on September 21, 2015, 02:01:59 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on September 20, 2015, 09:15:50 PM

So if we're quite finished exchanging pleasantries, let's move on. You shouldn't need much time to read it, as it's basically just upal's excellent proposal with some tweaks from juiceayres later in that same thread and now me combining it with a hint of BIP100-style voting to balance it out a smidgen.

Find someone willing to code it (you won't)

Also not what I'd call constructive. Maybe some actual feedback would get us somewhere? Which parts need work? What potential pitfalls might arise? You know, something helpful maybe. Genuine discussion about the pros and cons.

Or should I read your reply as "it's so perfect that I want to see it implemented right away"? Roll Eyes

Yeah, okay, I'm guessing it's not that.

Fact is, I'm not a coder or an engineer, so it seems prudent for me to make sure it's at least theoretically sound before I try to get it built.

Here is my constructive comment: unless a hard cap limiting the increase over a certain period of time is coupled to this proposal, any such scheme is utterly broken and can be trivially gamed by miners intent on controlling the blocksize.

Any such proposition is not viable given that it provides no consideration for the externalization of the cost to the nodes and our focus on keeping Bitcoin decentralized.