I would love to have more of a community call in addition to ACDs, where members can give their inputs on their priorities. I think this is completely missing at the moment. But just "extending the timelines" is precisely not what we should do.
I don't have an answer. But look at optimistic rollups with a typically 7 day fraud proof window. Current expectation is that in the face of a censorship attack, Ethereum could fix this and fork in that time span to recover. Requiring that an EIP needs "x week community consideration" seems wrong in this light.
I'm very sympathetic to the community having *much more* say in HF decisions, I really don't think that they should be left to core devs. OTOH, I also think that we need to be able to coordinate much quicker than we do today, on the order of days not weeks, in emergencies.
I think this is a very interesting question. I was very ambivalent about this EIP myself -- initially I was against it but changed my mind as it being the best thing to do right now, precisely because the hard fork process is very slow and drawn out.
I think the price of stability tends to be high in bear markets. Loss of confidence means lower appetite for leverage. I don't expect such a high loss in a more average year.
I wrote a new blog post explaining how RAI works, from the perspective of supply and demand for stablecoins: https://dankradfeist.de/ethereum/2023/01/31/rai-crypto-experiment.html
Ethereum research will host a reddit AMA on Jan 11 at 1pm UTC https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/107cqi8/ama_we_are_ef_research_pt_9_11_january_2023/
Interesting examples. What's the deeper reason if there is one? I would guess many of us find communities built around a single principle somewhat repelling, which may be a protective mechanism to stop us from joining dangerous cults?
Love it here. Hope the culture stays friendly!
Testing testing 123