Hard Fork Blog: Suggested Improvements

Improvements suggested by morcos, maaku, and /u/psztorc
This commit is contained in:
David A. Harding 2015-06-15 19:54:49 -04:00
parent 30cf561a6d
commit a02f364059
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4B29C30FF29EC4B7

View file

@ -8,20 +8,17 @@ title: "Bitcoin.org Hard Fork Policy"
permalink: /en/posts/hard-fork-policy.html
date: 2015-06-16
---
It appears that the recent block size debate will likely result in a
contentious hard fork attempt.
Contentious hard forks are bad for Bitcoin. At the very best, a
contentious hard fork will leave people who chose the losing side of the
fork feeling disenfranchised. At the very worst, it will make bitcoins
permanently lose their value. In between are many possible outcomes, but
none of them is good.
none of them are good.
The danger of a contentious hard fork is potentially so significant
that Bitcoin.org has decided to adopt a new policy:
> Bitcoin.org will not promote software or services that will leave the
> previous consensus because of a contentious hard fork attempt.
> previous consensus because of an intentional and contentious hard fork attempt.
This policy applies to full node software, such as Bitcoin Core,
software forks of Bitcoin Core, and alternative full node
@ -37,5 +34,5 @@ fork and which continues doing whatever it would've done anyway.
To be clear, we encourage wallet authors and service providers to offer
their opinions on hard fork proposals, and we will not penalize anyone
for contributing to a discussion. We will only stop promoting particular
wallets and services if they plan to move their users onto the
wallets and services if they plan to move their users onto a
contentious hard fork by default.