Quote from: tvbcof on August 27, 2015, 09:25:46 PM

I try to pay the equiv of around $10 per transaction in fees.

Quote from: tvbcof on August 24, 2015, 09:28:11 PM

and I pay currently 0.01 BTC as a fee since that was worth it for the service I get.

Wait, what? Did you suddenly get more generous in the last few days?

Quote from: tvbcof on August 27, 2015, 09:25:46 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on August 26, 2015, 11:50:26 AM

...

Quote from: tvbcof on August 24, 2015, 05:50:57 PM

I see a fair amount of utility in having an XT fork which siphoned off a sizable number of 'bitcoiners' who are deeply ignorant about the principles of the system and are mostly MultiBitch-class users who add no value.

...

Disgusting. Abhorrent. Bullshit.

Their argument has been backwards from the start. They're saying that people who support larger blocks want to change the way Bitcoin works and that they need to justify that change. But in reality, support for larger blocks is only ensuring Bitcoin continues to work in the same way it works now and always has done. A permissionless blockchain that's open to all. That's what we signed up for. It's the anti-fork crowd that need to justify forcing full blocks onto everyone and the only reason they can come up with is that it guarantees security for them and no one else matters. If you only want Bitcoin to benefit early adopters and risk driving everyone else away, then oppose larger blocks. But if you want an open system that's available for anyone to use, you'll support larger blocks.

The 'open to all' is EXACTLY the reason I feel as I do. I am very confident that if bitcoin bloats under the incorrect notion that 'open to all' means 'open to all for free' rather than 'open to all who are willing to support it' it will NOT be 'open to all' by any stretch.

Every single time it comes back to paranoia about free transactions. I don't care if free transactions get shoved off onto a third party payment network, but if a fee is paid, even an average one, the purpose of that fee is for a miner to confirm the transaction and secure it directly on the blockchain. Not to shove it off to some third party. Not to guess what fee you need to pay to make it in to the next block. Not to wait if you guess wrong. Not to provide a shitty service for the average user. Not to turn the forum into a massive clusterfuck of "Bitcoin is slow and expensive" (the opposite of what it is now). That's what you'll get if you try to run the network constantly with full blocks. If people keep suggesting that a fee market alone suddenly makes bitcoin scalable, they're simply deluded. Taking that route just means we'll be having this argument again later and it'll be much easier next time around when it's proven beyond all doubt you're wrong.

I'm not saying let's have an unlimited system and free shit for all. I don't think anyone is saying that. I'm saying let's have a realistic blocksize that reaches a fair compromise between security and capacity.

Hint: that compromise sure as hell isn't as small as possible to make a few early adopters wealthy and screw everyone else over.