From 5db9d918704bf19e8e9b30855f40c518365bedfc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matt Luongo Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:30:33 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Correct my Bitcoin history Thanks @lightcoin! --- zip-XXXX.rst | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/zip-XXXX.rst b/zip-XXXX.rst index 80300ee8..1a70f0aa 100644 --- a/zip-XXXX.rst +++ b/zip-XXXX.rst @@ -111,9 +111,10 @@ On a chain like Bitcoin, any of these roles can veto a network upgrade. new network rules, orphaning a minority effort. They can also attack any fork attempt that doesn't change 2. Users can veto a fork by refusing to update their full nodes, rejecting - blocks as invalid -- as demonstrated in the UASF fiasco resulting from the - SegWit2x attempt to force a Bitcoin hardfork. Users can also vote with their - dollars, acting as a fork resolution of last resort via market pressure. + blocks as invalid -- as demonstrated in the UASF movement successfully + countering the SegWit2x attempt to force a Bitcoin hardfork. Users can also + vote with their dollars, acting as a fork resolution of last resort via + market pressure. 3. Developers can refuse to update client codebases to follow a fork. While this might not seem like a strong veto, in practice that means any fork will need at least one additional development team, or the agreement of existing client