New Ideas Energize Ethereum Though True Signaling Solution Still Elusive

Named "EIP:0," a nod to the platform's process for accepting codes changes - the meeting consisted of members from a variety of startups and non-profits working to advance the technology, with notable members including Parity Technologies, the Web3 Foundation, the Ethereum Foundation, Giveth, Aragon, Consensys, MetaMask and others.

According to Rettig, much of the discussion surrounded how to better identify what constitutes a community member, or someone who should have a say in just how ethereum develops, and how to accurately measure their sentiment.

"There's general consensus that we need better signals," Rettig told CoinDesk.

Speaking at the event, several attendees expressed that far from being feared, the ability to create a new version of the ethereum blockchain in the case of divisive decisions is the ultimate, non-coercive tool for dissident groups to enact their opinions.

"Forks are absolutely essential," Rettig said.

In allowing communities the possibility of exit, Rettig and others expressed that the option to split off in case of contention is one of the key advantages that blockchains have over traditional governments.

"A fork is going to happen. I mean eventually there will be a fork," Rettig said, though he stressed this sentiment is more theoretical than a commentary on current events.

While a split is a clean way to settle disputes, there's messy, technical complications when it comes to enacting such a divide on ethereum.

Because ethereum is not just a blockchain, but a computation platform as well, every decentralized application would simultaneously co-exist on both versions of the platform.

"What happens to a stablecoin?" Rettig asked.