first of all - thanks a lot for having me here!
I read through the
Avalanche Consensus chapter of the documentation today and struggle with understanding the
Working Example section.
It would be really nice if you could help me with clearing up my misunderstandings!
In the middle of the example, the node learns about a
transaction Y' which conflicts with transaction Y.
The example then states
In this case, two of them say that they prefer Y' and two of them say that they do not prefer Y'
I do not understand why some of the validators would answer that they do not prefer Y’ in this case.
Figure 10 in the consensus whitepaper states that a validator will respond with a yes vote for a transaction T, if every ancestor T’ is preferred among competing transactions:
As far as I understand the example, the transaction Y’ has the ancestors W and V (and other accepted ancestors that were omitted from the example).
Both, W and V should be prefered because the do not have any competing transactions in the examnple as far as I see.
What is the reason for these validators to answer that they do not prefer Y’?
Thanks a lot in advance!