rich1.0npub1ttkq82l7hflyj6r3vxuw9c9pu7ce0fmaky98x3awz3cqpk7t5l0sz0gtzmhttps://nostr.ae/npub1ttkq82l7hflyj6r3vxuw9c9pu7ce0fmaky98x3awz3cqpk7t5l0sz0gtzmnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2017-03-28 📝 Original message:Thank you for the proposal Wang Chung! It is clear that, spam aside, blocks are getting full and we need increase them soon. What I don't like about your proposal is it forces all node operators to implicitly accept larger blocks in 2020, even maybe against their will. 32 MB blocks might result in a loss of decentralization, and it might be too difficult to coordinate for small blocks before it's too late. So I think Core can't decide on hard forks like this. It must be left up to the users. I think only choice is for Core to add a run-time option to allow node operators to increase block size limit, so that this very controversial decision is not coming from Core. It must come from the community. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170328/df218008/attachment-0001.html>