Quote from: CIYAM on January 19, 2016, 10:45:56 AM

I don't think he is a power-hungry maniac - but I do think that he thinks he (or his group) should be "calling the shots". If not then why support XT and now Classic which both have stated that they don't agree with the way that the Bitcoin project is being managed?

Define 'his group'? Majority of bitcoiners who want to stick to the original plan of scaling up and keep BTC useful also as a currency (inb4 - no it doesn't have to Visa-level volume)?

He wants to be calling the shots? Probably. But so do the core devs, and so does everyone else really. Everyone wants to see things going their way and get annoyed if they don't. And that's exactly why you're using scare tactics of 'hostile attack' and accusing him of dictatorship aspirations (despite the evidence), simply because his views are not in line with yours.

Gentle reminder: you (and other "1mb for life" supporters) are the one who wants to turn Bitcoin into something it wasn't originally meant to be. There's nothing wrong with it, but lets not pretend it's otherwise.

Gentle reminder2: When the XT kicked in, the core devs pretty much agreed that block size should be lifted at some point, they just wanted more time and less aggressive change. The proposed 2mb is very conservative, so lets see how it unfolds.

Quote from: CIYAM on January 19, 2016, 10:45:56 AM

Why not just go back to working with the Bitcoin Core devs (which he possibly could still do as he didn't "burn his bridges" like Hearn did)?

Working on what? Preparing ground for the upcoming Blockstream services? How would you effectively co-operate with bunch of people with different goals in mind?

Quote from: Bitcoinpro on January 19, 2016, 11:22:09 AM

start a new project and give commit acess to the miners

they are after all the people running the network

Huh? What are you on about?