I think most people are liars when it comes down to this topic, but if you really are brave enough to stay on the short side of a PoW fork- you've got bigger balls than me.
Yes, the fact that "most people are liars when it comes down to this topic" is why I asked you to account for the vast, empirically problematically significant discrepancy between self-reported trigger thresholds and actual compliance.
All you did, by hedging with your weaselly "subject to change" squishiness, was admit "75%" is a terrible idea.
I think we both know that BIP66's example of "95%" theoretical translating into 64% actual, in a non-contentious soft-fork no less, indicates GavinCoin will be a complete shit show whether it uses an ostensible 75%, 90%, or 95%.
Did you read the qntra and trilema links in my post?
They explain why saying on the short side is the safest strategy.
My coins are perfectly safe sitting out the Grand Schism.
OTOH, coins moved to the bloat-fork are at risk of being lost or becoming worthless:
Quote
http://qntra.net/2015/01/the-hard-fork-missile-crisis/
As the Giga-blockchain and main-blockchain continue to grow from the fork, those actively attacking the Giga-Blockchain will create many transactions that allow their main-blockchain coins to duplicate over to the Giga-blockchain while remaining safely on the main-blockchain. The transactions that succeed can then be used to acquire more main-blockchain coins upon which the cycle repeats. Eventually the blockchain with the most financial resources behind it will continue to grow at a faster pace, while the other slowly, and eventually stops growing altogether.
Those siding with the wrong chain who end up accepting duplicated transactions from the other chain, such as a purchase from an exchange running on the losing blockchain, will lose those coins when the dust settles. No war is without casulties, the Great Blockchain Civil War will be no different.
As the Giga-blockchain and main-blockchain continue to grow from the fork, those actively attacking the Giga-Blockchain will create many transactions that allow their main-blockchain coins to duplicate over to the Giga-blockchain while remaining safely on the main-blockchain. The transactions that succeed can then be used to acquire more main-blockchain coins upon which the cycle repeats. Eventually the blockchain with the most financial resources behind it will continue to grow at a faster pace, while the other slowly, and eventually stops growing altogether.
Those siding with the wrong chain who end up accepting duplicated transactions from the other chain, such as a purchase from an exchange running on the losing blockchain, will lose those coins when the dust settles. No war is without casulties, the Great Blockchain Civil War will be no different.
Bitcoin is not a democracy nor a popularity contest. Blocksize will not be determined by Gavin's Redditard Army.
The fork will be decided by economic power. Do you have more coins than MPEX and the #bitcoin-assets crowd, and the core devs, and btcdrak, etc.? Do Gavin and Hearn? No, I didn't think so either.
