Quote from: knight22 on August 19, 2015, 02:12:00 PM

Quote from: zeroday on August 19, 2015, 02:10:38 PM

+1 for Core.

Block size must be increased in Core version after reaching consensus among the community.

XT fork is bad solution for this problem. It also includes unannounced anti-Tor patch which makes it really outraging.

It's not a bad solution. It's actually a good solution to give a choice to the free market wills.

I would also prefer to see these changes implemented in Core. However that does not seem to be possible since some of the other core developers will not compromise and do not want to increase the block size limit at all. Therefore if we decide to stay with Core we will have one megabyte blocks forever.

We should not think that we must have the consensus of the core developers if that consensus becomes impossible to reach, since that is tantamount to centralization of power. The ability to hard fork in this way represents the check that we have against such power that a core development team could hold. This is part of what makes Bitcoin truly so decentralized. I do suggest that everyone reads Mike Hearn's article on why we should fork. Everyone should remember that this is not a popularity contest it does not matter who you like more or what you think of these people what matters is what is in the code itself. This is a crossroads in history and I hope that we collectively will make the right decision. So think carefully and please be rational and apply reason and decide for your self what kind of a Bitcoin you want.

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1