XT stifled the discussion, please spare us your revisionist history.
The whole act has been a huge drain on the attention and focus of the developing community.
You say drain, I say motivate. *poof* A BIP100 appears!
History is always revised according the viewpoint of the person recounting it. In those tricky cases where its recorded in black and white, it can be dismissed as an appeal to authority.
Hmm, who should I believe about the impact of XT on BTC development?
Clueless nobody sgbett (who believed "
Pseudo nodes aren't mining blocks") or uber-crypto-boss Adam Back (BitGold, Blockstream)?
As for BIP100, please note it's not even fully specified, much less coded. Given that context, BIP100 means nothing more than a vote against 101.
BIP100 was obviously just the nearest handy large rock for the pools to pick up and beat XT to death with.
BIP100 can be gamed and it sets a bad precedent, thus the socioeconomic majority won't give miners that much power.
I know you and Garzik are all hot and bothered over it, but sorry, it ain't gonna happen.
#REKKKKT