For the upcoming issues with governance in Bitcoin Cash, it's at least clear that the majority of the is against the proposal of the Grasberg DAA, and there currently is no good form of voting on this issue. In Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash, voting comes from hashrate, and hashpower, and currently is challenging to gather actual results on hashrate voting, or even knowing exactly how much of the community is in support of, or against certain proposals for more technical aspects of development. A lot of people have referenced this chart to show that ABC has the overwhelming majority of hashing power, and that BCHN is in the minority, and therefore going to result in a BCHN minority split, despite the fact that BCHN wants to AVOID said split.
Not too long ago, read.cash user JavierGonzalez made a post titled "Why Bitcoin Cash Need the BMP?" where he discussed the possibility of a new type of voting system called BMP, in which hashpower could be used to individually vote on open polls by dedicating their hashrate to any given option on the poll. This is a great system in my opinion, and the voting works just like Bitcoin: hashpower. I think that this can be integrated as a part of the development process for new changes on the BCH protocol to avoid a split, and can also give people an idea as to how likely it is that one feature or another is going to be implemented within the protocol, however, there also are other issues that come from voting purely on hashrate:
SHA 256 hashrate allocated on voting options on the polls can come from potentially conflicting interests, such as Bitcoin, and Bitcoin SV pools who will try and vote with their hashpower on what is worst for Bitcoin Cash, as an attempt to suppress it and suit their individual narratives
Any time a poll is launched, any big miner potentially having a size-able hashrate on BTC can switch over their hashrate to a pro-BCH pool to try and influence any potential results of said poll
If the time a poll launching is known, BTC and BSV pools and hashrate can collude to make changes to which pools they are assigning hashrate to, and ensure that any potential hashrate that might be or might have been in favour of certain proposals
I'm not someone with a lot of technical knowledge, but what I propose is a BMP poll that is held at a random time by a neutral third party in which pro-BCH pools vote on which path they want to take (ASERT or Grasberg), and have it time-locked so pools have enough time to be aware of said "poll", but there's not enough time for potentially conflicting hashrate to join in, and skew the results. Furthermore, pools could agree to lock hashrate at this time so that in the timeframe, hashrate can leave pools, but no new hashrate (potentially with ulterior motives) can join it. With this, I hope we can find an accurate way to measure how many of the miners are in support of one path over another, and by how much. Any other suggestions on how we can get fairer results are welcome.
