I am interested in understanding what you are proposing. Assuming it goes through and all somehow agree on what's moral, however difficult that is, what if the 'consensus-driven moral' becomes immoral? Are morals objective in this proposal?
Login to reply
Replies (1)
> Are morals objective in this proposal?
As objective as the other morals enforced in the consensus rules, such as the anti-doublespend rule, the supply cap, and the proof of work requirement
To me, asking "What if the spam limits lose consensus in the future" is similar to asking "What if the 21 million cap loses consensus in the future"?
I think that would be a bad thing, and I would advocate for restoring it