### VOTING is CLOSED for BUIPs 6,38,40,41 & 42 ###

[solex]

Membership vote on BU Improvement Processes

Five BUIPs are open for voting

Please reply to this thread

Votes are for/against or yes/no
Votes can be in the same message e.g. "for x,y,z" or "against a,b,c" where x,y,z etc are BUIP numbers.

Technical BUIPs
BUIP006: Blocktorrent – a torrent-style block data transport [funded]

BUIP038: Revert "Sticky gate"

BUIP040: Emergent Consensus Parameters and Defaults for >1MB blocks

BUIP041: (BUIP038 Counter):

Prevent Minority Hash Power From Injecting Very Large Blocks into the Blockchain

Note that BUIP041 is a counter to BUIP038 so whichever gets the highest number of votes is implemented while the other is not implemented.​

Membership BUIP
BUIP042: New Members for Election #34

All listed for membership are considered together i.e. "BUIP042 FOR" or "BUIP042 AGAINST"
Exceptions may be identified by using list number and +/- to include or exclude e.g. -88 +99 or exclusions may be made by name e.g. ZZZ AGAINST
BUIP042 is considered as counted last so new members may not vote on the Technical BUIPs concurrent with this.​

Votes need to be signed.

Please get involved. Bitcoin Unlimited is the start of a new paradigm where the membership decides on the admission of new members and operational changes requiring expenditure of funds.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
VOTING IS OPEN for BUIP006 BUIP038 BUIP040 BUIP041 BUIP042
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
15TiujYmnHa33fjEnasBBm1eWcGx9YEXPL
IHn6DpzQDgVwIuuoJWWcdRDNdSk0QSHq3SS7tO/MkgIwEMT7A+U8PmIybhdEtQX8Ig2zlDKscYtUZr4jP5o5PMc=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

 

[Mengerian]

BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @eurovive NO
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES
BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES

13JdYTKi4QN6KyYWwifCvNMeaRaeq1JQ38

H09jtwtT8EVXRxOGK6SfoURXlvtc0aJzZV8+2Gz0E174PEyUNP+tKcq9/VA9TkiCCKVQjsU1e2wfftzS9mFztcs=

 

[solex]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 FOR
BUIP038 AGAINST
BUIP040 FOR
BUIP041 FOR
BUIP042 FOR, jonny1000 AGAINST, eurovive AGAINST
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
IB7z9M+zJFceo+7JWAHYaYu4j8THrQw/n0SPjOUwNilWOVRxOzsoqUkGdQ5BsQIJOQ4YBdsGLMhrw/PNhxM6ibM=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

 

[Peter Tschipper]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 NO
BUIP038 NO
BUIP040 NO
BUIP041 YES

BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @eurovive NO
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES
BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
IIBTd97ALak2CueU/6Be/r2oBWdTkuqUuouiXmjHglAaWTW40Gshu4W4W0Xw2Ftg5HmHTYRHzrSbkphNUPEXcCc=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----

pubkey: 1AmdP3nFWSJhkzszXHZNQiJLx7eUGRbzvs

 

[theZerg]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 YES
BUIP038 NO
BUIP040 YES
BUIP041 YES

BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @eurovive NO -- Nick we don't have much info about you and little participation on the forum. Membership is for those who want to actively vote on issues. Participate more here and then we can reconsider.
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES
BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
Gwf5E/WzSWp8C2/MucSHwtIDTIM0V1IaXUcvZrLGnwMjK3LngkSK8NRvLkKYk5D5EsgC6uKg6FeKkPzfIwqEqaE=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----

 

[Bagatell]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 YES
BUIP038 NO
BUIP040 NO
BUIP041 YES
BUIP042 YES -3 -8
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
IIiCFVC9QXrMrXHgtbWVCedoONZHCe6JMJd5sC/gKyo7E+oeSzZZJ5m8afn7pQ92uL7Nd5AZwCkqM+TeMlXbO+w=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----

 

[TrevinHofmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

BUIP006 AGAINST
BUIP038 FOR
BUIP040 FOR
BUIP041 AGAINST
BUIP042 FOR, @eurovive AGAINST

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYZEGvAAoJEHN9+j2LWHie0SYIAN7GkmHXUuOTt3lAl7ChJpFR
7qxv81Zot+pzUYfYniAxpJax3eGr43s9E7c/UZKHLaSELOkml4zgpOz40+92HA4s
/WKHrikIHodzcw4PK9UasMIIsF2gVVP4eQL6TXetOYUDPyh9lrjpB2E41AHT1OW3
7MG5zUZJJF3xWosu3DYdJ/4meQA4j6HC3+fXSbbd31UTxqSOue3XjKBYbfHn/4ct
Dg0IL9eFQh/toJo1CvajuZ2DspGX+AK7qca3UzWD04T59WJMpU48xiByqDRDuLQV
CokG9thATeZx1qWHoznnWxKZDb4c1gySXyn9PnkqopUE7KP1ZC8vpDsAg49eTeI=
=wrBx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[freetrader]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Comment: Signed by Bitcoin Armory v0.93.2

BUIP006 FOR
BUIP038 FOR
BUIP040 AGAINST
BUIP041 AGAINST
BUIP042 FOR, jonny1000 AGAINST, eurovive AGAINST
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----


HBNxQbKrsYy99cE/pcHizlrJC8zqYNbk4GQjGg17e57GW3dK8Mjec6MHNI68H3pm
g83fnXYmUyd9c2hGCfNeMd8=
=EWT1
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----

This was a difficult vote, and I'm going to add explanations of why I voted against 040 / 041 at this time to the respective BUIPs.

 

[digitsu]

BUIP006 YES

BUIP038 NO

BUIP040 YES

BUIP041 NO

BUIP042 @jake YES

BUIP042 @mike YES

BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO

BUIP042 @Rogerver YES

BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES

BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES

BUIP042 @Haiyang YES

BUIP042 @eurovive NO

BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES

BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES

signature
G2/VQOCCMSBMAqlUe1ngJ6GoHPvbM+Rgz5FrrByAkkmFHulJhDqA7NVt3WhO5u/iWERicC7EJc2G6/92o63df5o=
[doublepost=1483002027][/doublepost]I'd like to also point out that between BUIP38 and BUIP41 it isn't a "the one with most votes will be implemented". Voting against both is a vote to keep the current code AS-IS, which is equally valid. (and as you can see, my vote)
( at least until BUIP41 is a bit more tested and polished in terms of AD setting sensitivities )

 

[Norway]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 FOR
BUIP038 AGAINST
BUIP040 FOR
BUIP041 FOR
BUIP042 FOR, jonny1000 AGAINST, eurovive AGAINST
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
IC4OuvYmZncapudZIDyNcnMqucwEjFfQQfpH3QbCBMExe9nQjg1jDUi6fIAaSGZoyd3hIhM3NmpgJnHgZqqu8iw=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

 

[jonny1000]

BUIP042 FOR, @eurovive AGAINST

Thanks for your kind support for my membership application

 

[lunar]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 FOR
BUIP038 AGAINST
BUIP040 FOR
BUIP041 FOR
BUIP042 FOR, -3,-8
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
HytrLSyMzpgGP+KLmLc3EhWz7StoXtjzHN4rlMFVMpflOQ9SNeRI6vUZZehvCW+B2U/Gqa78iOvPdZc/yMDatXw=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

BU-Key: 1BpYYT2HQzQdz5CFPM1nehCZd1xWPtNbma

 

[Roy Badami]

BUIP038 NO
BUIP040 YES
BUIP041 YES

BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES
BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES

(Abstaining on BUIP006 and eurovive)

H2HvQcagAAx6XSLyQEOqiRz+ruXOfzZVQOlQJQWfnGg5BkujSTtrAGqF6MPqd+5mNj1UVWdHzgITGtY1yxKPjsQ=

 

[deadalnix]

====
BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @eurovive NO
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 PASS
BUIP042 @adamstgbit PASS

BUIP006 YES
BUIP040
1. YES
2. NO - keep hard limit
3. YES

BUIP038 NO
BUIP041 NO

The state of affaire with BUIP038 and BUIP041 is not clear enough. I would vote for "report" if this was an option. I'm not per se against these proposal, I just think this needs to be fleshed out more.
====
II9OCHaXr9tSqGCo/Mbi/xirzyBRLn22nXWPe8eQIz/WHEyUWRBU1dSlsDu/C8vf5iHxLNR8cK8WgKvKRcGdQlI=

Bu key: 1KEaWZ7tpLF4n5xFf5bpTPff7G7uJZiDGw

 

[Roy Badami]

@deadalnix You need to sign your vote, otherwise it won't be counted.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

-- Beginn Bitcoin signed message --

BUIP006: No

BUIP042: Yes for everybody except Jonny1000

BUIP038/040/041: No/No/No. The vote seems to early, since the technical discussion is not solved. Voting should only substitute a technical consensus if there is the thread of stalling. This is not the case with this BUIPS.

-- End Bitcoini signed message --
H4wk397EI6+aheWJarWY5/IfUPLnbW5snkacvZUcSB0KVV8prLPKG0UiZPL+5HDEUxR7zWICoP0e/TxCeJEarqk=

(Address is 1BvayiASVCmGmg4WUJmyRHoNevWWo5snqC)

 

[chriswilmer]

-- Begin Bitcoin signed message --
BUIP038 AGAINST
BUIP040 FOR
BUIP041 FOR
BUIP042 FOR, jonny1000 AGAINST
-- End Bitcoin signed message --
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
IPnTMTfataZg4LNekx2pvkLpuIMzOEeqfxWV+rSRRPEGEpTOUCDPl1dJLd42bJ+zm4/pykjVqr1ZnJ4g8rZaKDw=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----

After carefully reading discussions for each BUIP, I am somewhat surprised people are voting for BUIP006... the discussion seems to kind of trail off with people saying "yeah, we probably don't need this." If the answer is, :"well, it's a small amount of money and it *might* be useful" then yeah, sure, I agree with that. I'm just wondering if that's the rationale others have or if I am missing something.

 

[Roy Badami]

The argument seems to be that BUIP006 will give us gains over Xthin as we scale above 8-10MB. I confess I don't understand why that should be - but I abstained from voting on this BUIP because I haven't followed the discussion closely enough to have an opinion. On the flip side, I'm in favour of experimenting with novel block propagation strategies and new peer-to-peer network designs if it has the potential to be beneficial. I just don't know enough to vote on this. But we should probably take this discussion to the BUIP006 thread...

 

[digitsu]

BUIP006 YES

BUIP038 NO

BUIP040 YES

BUIP041 NO

BUIP042 @jake YES

BUIP042 @mike YES

BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO

BUIP042 @Rogerver YES

BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES

BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES

BUIP042 @Haiyang YES

BUIP042 @eurovive NO

BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES

BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES

signature
G2/VQOCCMSBMAqlUe1ngJ6GoHPvbM+Rgz5FrrByAkkmFHulJhDqA7NVt3WhO5u/iWERicC7EJc2G6/92o63df5o=
[doublepost=1483002027][/doublepost]I'd like to also point out that between BUIP38 and BUIP41 it isn't a "the one with most votes will be implemented". Voting against both is a vote to keep the current code AS-IS, which is equally valid. (and as you can see, my vote)
( at least until BUIP41 is a bit more tested and polished in terms of AD setting sensitivities )

=====amendment begin
I didn't think of voting in a 'partial' way as Deadalnix just did. I was really just interested in the sigops limit counting in BUIP040 anyhow, so I would like to amend my BUIP040 vote to
BUIP040
1. YES
2. NO - keep hard limit
3. YES

=====Signature for above amendment
G9CRPNApVccGm7fXfndxFM7/c6rv5DveXBXQ8fFNEDb5Yc6znR+4YIYgZUJ7RbmGAm4IX6V7gjHKaIVId6gh0lo=

 

[Peter R]

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP006 NO

BUIP042 @jake YES
BUIP042 @mike YES
BUIP042 @jonny1000 NO
BUIP042 @Rogerver YES
BUIP042 @dgenr8 YES
BUIP042 @Emil Oldenburg YES
BUIP042 @Haiyang YES
BUIP042 @eurovive NO
BUIP042 @Helvetian616 YES
BUIP042 @adamstgbit YES
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1BWZe6XkGLcf6DWC3TFXiEtZmcyAoNq5BW
IJ8KXeWBLLpN7utii8aKxMp7SjgxfdfGw9q/hVIuaZR2qL5vrqzL2TYBHgOeDGD5rlcNt5t1XPCJN3sxW3SOy9w=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I'm voting NO to BUIP006 because we've already invested considerably in Xthin / Xpedited, which IMO is a superior solution.

I'm voting against @eurovive because I don't have enough information about him, and I'm voting against @jonny1000 because I don't believe his vision for Bitcoin Unlimited is inline with the other members. I am very happy to have all the other applicants apply and think they'll make great members!

I'm abstaining from the three other BUIPs; I think we need better clarity on what exactly we're trying to achieve on these topics.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BUIP038 YES
BUIP040 YES
BUIP041 YES
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1BWZe6XkGLcf6DWC3TFXiEtZmcyAoNq5BW
HyjvEUJTXVaefvFYrEVgSoHFWjKvsDHko2xFSOYm1scJOX0BHRzk4jF4+8SwdeYP4AOjxdG9b6A/y0jGMxYZ/Rw=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I'm voting for BUIP040 because miners want this in order to run Bitcoin Unlimited (note that this is NOT changing the default block size limit!).

As far as BUIP038 / BUIP041, I'm partial to 038 but I'm voting for both because I think both would be improvements.