Id like a response from devs if possible. It’s a two step process, one for variable block size, the other for automatic fees. Id like to hear the developers comment on the technical possibility for variable block size at least.
Or i guess you meant the 2 mb vote. I personally wont vote for that because i dont think we need it and i think it makes our spam protection worse. I realize it’s political, but i just think we should keep our bite bigger than our bark.
I consider the variable fee based on fill level more important.
The voting for 2 MB maximum block size can easily be understood outside Nu.
Implementing it isn’t even important to show that Nu is able to form consensus by motion - in difference to so many other crypto currency projects.
It’s a corporation and the owners are allowed to decide!
So are you asking me to vote for something i dont actually want to see implemented?
(Not like you or me directly or whatever, the royal you and me)
Short version: yes.
Extended version: I don’t see need to have it implemented soon.
I see need for both the variable fee and the block size increase.
I consider the variable fee more important than the block size increase.
I want to provide the world outside with an example of Nu’s superior consensus mechanism.
Or another tack: we vote to affirm the current the 60 megabytes per hour of block capacity as “sufficient in the near term given the growth patterns seen on the Nu network in particular and trends seen in the cryptocoin space in general” and that it will be "regularly reviewed by Nu shareholders, including interim discussions on variable block scaling and fees for spam transaction protection. "
An additional note that this is is 10x Bitcoin’s capacity of 6 megabytes per hour would be good, even though both are based on 1 megabyte blocks, and that average transaction volume of NuBits is growing at approximately 100% year-on-year.