At present, the world's second most valuable black chain is larger and more diverse, getting input from its constituency is troublesome.
In fact, the proposals aimed at controversial issues are the protocol's guide that it does not have questions in its developer rankings lately about a series of lost - lost fund recovery, ether supply rate and the emergence of new mining hardware - coordination of speech and often consensus in controversial attitude.
Recently, many developers have also taken the lead, the new department, after EIP 999, that such departments may have widespread resistance, which may lead to the creation of two inequality blackjones.
And many well-known developers, including software creator Wiltic Beutrine, have retracted the idea of a split probability, but it is a disadvantage and choice of a network of fork to benefit anybody who codifies it.
Furthermore, understanding how positive such an event has become its own technical challenge.
Apart from being split into developers, there is a vast community on this topic with the "coin-voting" website - the web page that allows Atheal users to vote on items based on the number of ether coins and against it.
Displays the same sentimental inherent in social media.
Ashley Tyson of the Web3 Foundation, Coin Daysk, said, "We're currently signaling off, it's a really incomplete way to meet the needs of society." The Petty Fund Freeze lost 210 million dollars. "You can supervise the Reddit or Twitter, but it must be a definite reflection of the community [but it's not]," she said.
However, this problem is not unique.
In fact, bitcoin developers, miners, beginnings and customers have shown competitive views at various times in CryptocaRaural history, especially during a scaling debate (in August last year, to create a competitive cryptographic system by breaking the main chain with some members of the community).
The problem often seems to arise from developer conversations in the networks and meetings that take place on platforms and technical discussions such as GitHub. Therefore, it is challenging for a viewer who does not use technology, and newer users are not yet properly represented concerns.
While all software changes are not directly affecting the average customer - they are just simpler advantages to improving platforms in discrete ways - some important voices believe that shareholders are important for most people. Controversial changes can generally affect the system's core values.
"You can not create a rule process without active participation of all participants," said Péter Szilágyi, a space developer, CoinDesk.
And everybody was happy with the process of sculpture, he continued:
"As long as people feel something is being forced on them, they will fight it. Build something together that's beneficial to both sides, and everyone will consider it an upgrade."
Imperfect signals
If the Cryptocurrency community has not been clearly visible from serious discussions and airy over the last few years, it's much easier to do.
Currently, the only way to measure community sentiment is through social media channels and coin-voting sites.
Shouting in social media can be useful as a useful metric to find out how the community feels about a particular topic, which has problems. Trolls enable and run spam accounts for dominant and fake accounts, all enhanced by a general agreement to increase financial gain or controversy.
For this reason, a developer meeting last week, Jutta Steiner, last week, promises that proposal to the customers that the CEO of Patiet Technologies, warned that social media will actually give a deep impression of how much controversy over these issues, adding fire to potentially sensitive issues.
Speaking in 999 EIP, Steiner said, "I did not convince [EIIP 999] to appear to be controversial sometimes in social media."
"I'll draw the momentum on the basis of social media because I think this is a very important issue and it's not just empty."
She added:
While the mob psychology that is expanding in social media is an effective way to voice your voice, it will have to sabotage arguments silently and these groups are unclear whether anyone is too few real people.
"Who knows a number of user names about how a party uses," said Tyson Coindesk, "and is that person even representing a full community member?"
Some are used to try and clear the extreme trend, coin-voting is another way of measuring concentration community sentiment. This approach was first used heavily after the DAO hack, making it possible for consumers to seek a consensus on what they would like to hardk for the block to get Ether back to the victims.
At the time, many misinterpreted this approach and many criticized that Ether holders were not open enough to respond correctly. Plus, because the weight of a particular vote is about how much a share - or the size of the ether - has a user, some argue that Ether Rich holds more control.
Coin-voting systems are dealing with the same criticism today.
"Minority voices, how they pay, are never heard," said Communications Officer Officer in Strydon, Skodon Coindesk,
"The more money you have the more you can control the result."
Finding solutions?
And there's no easy solution in the hands of the developers and groups.
For example, in detail by CoinDesk, many developers have started a group called Eteram magicians' fellowship based on special forum and individual-person conferences to coordinate changes on stage. Also, when this group strikes between the group developer community and other interested parties, it still does not have a broader category.
Many united members were beaten.
For one, ethereum communication officer Hudson Jameson etherium GitHub repository has been moved to a separate webpage, which highlights various code proposals in a more accessible manner.
A member of the Athero magicians Lane Retegge expressed his commitment to better inform the processes of the Atherim regime in a blog post, whose vision of Atheum was "rational, structured, well-intended, financially motivated humans" by selfish and selfless inclinations alike. "
Also, in EDCON at the Atheum Educational Conference this week, Rettig organized a workshop, hoping he would break the network's basics and philosophical predictions behind these policies.
Also, there may be more creative solutions in the horizon.
For example, core developer Alex Van de Sunday proposed a code change, all controversial issues - fund recovery, ether issuance and ASIC mining - is currently being discussed.
Ether developers are looking to change the protocol's protocol to proof-of-stock, eliminating the proof-of-work mining, and Van de Sander indicates that all future ether issuance must be sent into a smart agreement, which serves as a type of insurance policy for the community. In the case of lost ether, re-use can be used to make totally lost users.
Commenting on this proposal, Van D. Sede wrote, "The platform should be seen to resolve disputes, preventing the implementation of controversial hard-forks, and not using them to eliminate the power of users and developers."
Still, the proposal was not widely accepted.
Also, Web3's Tyson ended: