Quote from: Lauda on January 31, 2016, 10:46:31 AM

Quote from: ATguy on January 31, 2016, 10:33:23 AM

..snip..
BTW denying majority do not want change is completly out of reallity, and they are not sockpupets, just check CMO of HaoBTC for example he is talking about real and really prominent Chinese Bitcoiners with overwhelming sentiment for real change, not just to 2 MB:

I didn't mean that. Quite a lot of people want to scale Bitcoin right now, they just can't agree on how to proceed. The minority however is fighting for a successful political fork.

Quote from: ATguy on January 31, 2016, 10:33:23 AM

Quote from: eric@haobtc on January 29, 2016, 11:12:06 AM

Here I am going to share with you what I saw and heard rather than my personal thoughts: I went to a Bitcoin event in Beijing last week. Some prominent Chinese Bitcoiners were also there. The sentiment was overwhelming that the ideal solution to the scaling question is implementing 2MB block size through a Core update as soon as possible. The Bitcoin Core team doesn't want to make a precedent because the team is controlled by Blockstream, who bet heavily on the success of Sidechains and Lightning Networks.

This is what I dislike. The post is based on uncertainty and not technicalities. Sidechains are going to be a success regardless of who is developing the main Bitcoin repository. Without LN on the other hand Bitcoin will never be able to scale enough for global adoption. Blockstream will most likely gain nothing from LN. Another thing that concerns me is this 'as soon as possible' which is an subjective and undefined time period. I would say that a scheduled hard fork needs to take place a minimum of 6 months from now (that's me willing to compromise, else I'd require more time). Others however want to rush it out as fast as it is possible to gain 75% threshold (some have said within a month; I disagree with the time and threshold).

Yes but I feel its really is Blockstream/Core that is creating the uncertainty through their poor communication, poor transparency, and inflexibility. Eric hits it right on the head as far as community feeling like they are being ignored and feeling like Blockstream wants to control everything. That's exactly my sentiment. It's not that I think the Classic team is necessarily better than Core (although I do highly respect Gavin and Jeff Garzik), but we're frustrated.

As far as Blockstream not profiting from LN. Ok, you can make that argument all you want but until its clear how Blockstream will profit, things are naturally suspicious.

Btw, I apologize if my yesterday my remarks about your attitude seemed like an attack. I just think you are stuck thinking in one way about this, but we all have our biases.