From what I have gathered reading about this topic a couple of times is the discussion is still theryetical. If that is the case I really liked the idea’s discussed on this thread:
Continuing the discussion from How to go about controversial changes once the community takes over? :
I put this in RFC, but its not yet. Hopefully we can come up with something to propose though.
I’m not sure how many people here follow Bitcoin closely, but there is a small war going on with the core developers about the direction Bitcoin should be going. I thought Bitcoin would be around for the long haul, but this is really something that could kill it from the inside and it’s a shame. The changes being proposed don’t change the way the protocol works, but are more how to go about the vision of what it was created to do.
I’m looking for ways that we can propose to resolve issues like this in the safe network once the community “takes over”. Right now we’re still in “Satoshi nakomoto” time. David is still calling the shots and he has made outstanding decisions so far.
How can we go about dealing with contentious changes in how to implement changes based on difference in opinion on how to go about things? (or controversial issues in general) I think it is important to have a standard in place before they happen so we, as a community, don’t tear ourselves apart from the inside as Bitcoin seems to be doing.
What interested me the most was mimicking how human DNA is “upgraded.”