human consensus? Normally these networks operate on machine-consensus and not sockpuppet-consensus.
You're not making a lot of sense to me with that line of thought, sorry.
You're replacing rule of code by arbitrary actions.
The people are a lower level and cause, reason, foundation.
Machines are not alive.
Machines can't have consensus.
"Machine consensus" is only = "consensus of people to run the same blockchain", (whichever (patched) blockchain that is.)
Machines are convenience tools to ease/automate repetitive tasks.
Unique issues require unique (human) solutions!
myriad of rollback-scams ..... u opened a can of worms.
This choice may stay the only one. But it doesn't make a difference.
You don't need a replicable process for unique issues more than before or after or in any other blockchain!
(But i will join the thread if you want to think about possible rules of voting about blockchains other than simply "majority" and their possible implementation. I guess one would want this voting to pass by >(100% -x*stolen funds% -y) )
Again can't agree in those fears at all.
It is not arbitrary. As said the only fear it comes down to, if you meant that at all, is the general fear for any community, or blockchain, that hard choices could split them. Bitcoin traders had that fear for bitcoinXT but short dump and pump was already the biggest consequence yet once again. Obviously the voting was not about bitcoin to fail or not. And even if such a split should happen ever to any cryptocurrency currency it will be impressive. Both currencies together may not be worth less than the one was before and there would a striking reason.
- Yet easier choices, that may pass near consensus,
can only reassure integrity of the community.
A blockchain is true if the people decide it to be true. The only true Ethereum blockchain may soon have the theft undone - or not if people should sympathize with the thief. Undoing it may increase social value/sympathy in Ether and the braveness of the community, if it pioneers in deciding such.
Not doing anything could appear passive but obviously this would also take away all hardfork fears (if they are real)
both ways the market would calm.
people can't have consensus, only machines can. Social consensus means: "bully out and flame everyone who disagrees until only people are left that agree"
You aren't ready for true social conseus - all we can talk about is machine-conseus.
"machines can't have consensus"? Then why is bitcoin working?
majority rule = mob rule and communism
you go fork your network on 51%-vote. I'll be waiting here and watching
So "truth is what the majority says"? Oh boy, you got it upside down ..
Nobody who's worth their salt is going to invest big bucks in that chain. Developement and community are incompetent, it has been shown 1000 times and this thread is #1001
