Quote from: yona on August 08, 2013, 11:01:18 AM

the post is not talking about boycotting ASIC miners, only on retrieving the power to 'vote',
i actually brought up the term 'economic majority' which was attributed to you, and i am trying to think how to apply it in the future of the protocol when the set block reward will not be as significant as the transaction fee.

Ok, I think I understand a bit better what you're trying to do.

I had noticed you linked to the page on economic majority. I should point out that the page had some information which I think is untrue and is different from what I was thinking of when bringing up the term (I've now edited it).

Specifically, people who have bitcoins don't have much power in this - they'll have the same bitcoins whatever fork is chosen, and must go along with whatever other people choose if they want their bitcoins to maintain the value. Those with power are people who have other things of value which they are willing to exchange for bitcoins - they can hold their valuables hostage and refuse to give them away for bitcoins of the "wrong" branch.

Basically, if Bitcoin is seen abstractly as a service provider, you can only negotiate your "terms" (how the Bitcoin protocol works) before buying - afterwards you're locked in.

Of course, you can have bitcoins and still offer more valuables for more bitcoins, with bargaining power corresponding to the additional value you can offer.

The point of this is that
1. You should not expect people who have bitcoins (and can thus pay tx fees) to have a say in this.
2. No special action is needed to maintain the power of the economic majority, this happens organically through market forces.
3. Trying to maintain voting power by choosing who can mine a tx is not appropriate, as the real voting is not done in mining, but on the market.