Re: The Barry Silbert segwit agreement with >80% miner agreement.
However one question remains: Does BIP91 use 2MB block size or 1MB?
BIP91 is only a mechanism to assure that all miners that accept Segwit2x will also signal for the "traditional" Segwit (BIP141). It has not directly something to do with the 1MB vs. 2MB debate. If BIP91 is locked in, all miners that run that client will have the rule that they only mine blocks on chains where all blocks are signalling for Segwit.
Indirectly it has something to do, as miners that support the agreement are meant to use the Segwit2x code, and in this implementation the 2MB hard fork will be integrated. But a miner can perfectly run a custom client with BIP91 and without the 2MB part (as far as I understand it).
My head hurts...but from my limited programming (basic on a 1976 apple ][)
the emergent consensus will get everyone on board to turn on seg witness, but it will have nothing to do at this time for doing a 2mb hard fork which they want
thus can't bitcoin core or someone ...let emergent consensus work in their favor and then simply have enough clout to block a future 2mb hard fork anyway
if this is so, emergent consensus signaling is simply a face-saving measure to get seg witness up by those who want a 2mb block and hope reasonableness wins later with bitcoin core
and hard fork of 2mb? In other words this whole cluster of 2mb hard forks would again rear its ugly head with no real solutions?
Again.....just trying to follow all this in my limited manner (I work with dev disabled deaf-blind folk..how I fell into techy miner stuff is anyone's guess)
