Wouldn't they lobby the miners?
Interesting writeup by nostr:npub1ej493cmun8y9h3082spg5uvt63jgtewneve526g7e2urca2afrxqm3ndrm about various drive-chain risks. Selfishly I'm mostly worried about disgruntled token holders lobbying core devs to blacklist a specific "bad" peg out transaction hash.
Discussion
Presumably both. Lobby miners to vote no, or lobby devs to blacklist the withdrawal transaction. The latter presumably fails, but can still be a massive distraction and involve (legal) harassment.
That seems like a strech. After all, even if the core devs (the people with write access to the github repo) make the black listing node software, there is zero guarantee people will run it.
It appears that you are simply rephrasing the classic UASF concern that has been addressed many times already.
Nobody is going to run the malware that CSW wants either. Didn't stop him from dragging a dozen developers into a multi million dollar lawsuit.
Exactly, we already have the problem of people suing devs. Drivechains doesn't change that.
It increases the number of potential issues to sue over and the number of (potentially well funded) plaintiffs.
That's a strech too. The number of lawsuits will be determined almost entirely to other factors. As csw shows, your claim does not need any legitimacy to cause huge problems for devs.
Which is not to say thay suing devs for a miners steal transaction would have any legitimacy whatsoever