His style is very combative but underneath it he obviously shows great passion for the topic, and we need passionate people, they make the world go'round I just wish BAC and some of the other participants would keep it civil for fear of this spinning out of control and getting locked down. This has obviously become personal too, which does not add anything good to the topic.

BAC I have a question for you: do you see a problem with a large exchange, for example coinbase, deciding to dig all of their constituents' wallets for clams, and gaining all the riches from them? (not all exchanges will be noble like Poloniex, as the current digger is proving). If you do see a problem with that, then advocating not changing anything and staying the course is not compatible. Because I think it is a huge problem that goes against the grain of "fair distribution" that was the very intent of this coin. As Doog put it, it would be technically not feasible to somehow "blacklist" exchanges from perpetrating such offense, so we need another solution. But I do think it is worth pursuing a solution as long as it is compatible with the core principles of the coin.

I think it is very important to realize that changing the rules along the way is not necessarily compromising the "foundation", so long as it is done for the right reasons, ie as I have stated before, as long as we don't change rules with the purpose of preserving the monetary value of the coin. If we do it to preserve the "fair distribution", then it's ok. Understand, it is not always possible for founders to foresee all possible contingencies from the very beginning. That is why the US constitution had 27 amendments. Did the amendments compromise the constitution? No, because they were enacted in the spirit of preserving and BUILDING upon the the Constitution and what it was trying to accomplish. We have an opportunity now to build upon and improve this coin.

If you disagree, please reason with me. Lets resolve this with logic and not emotions.