← Back to team overview

mimblewimble team mailing list archive

Re: Elapsed-Time-Scaled Block Size


Given that nodes would not propagate future-dated blocks, what's a scenario
where gaming timestamps would be plausible?

On Nov 23, 2017 7:05 AM, "John Tromp" <john.tromp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Wouldn't this create an incentive for a miner to include all transactions
> with fees attached from the mempool and publish the block with a time
> enough in the future to allow that size of block?

Yes, it clearly provides incentives to lie about timestamps,
which I think is enough to make it a bad idea.