Quote from: Blazed on February 09, 2016, 05:06:10 PM

I know that I will be dumping both chains if we fork to a new client.

Quote from: Lauda on February 09, 2016, 04:52:56 PM

Quote from: ATguy on February 09, 2016, 04:28:24 PM

Do you realy want handfull of Core developers have the ultimate power to decide when it is needed, which is not purely technical question but much more economical one, no mater what consequences to whole 6-7 Billion Bitcoin economy decision of handfull Core developers might become?

Do you really think that something would change with Classic? People seem to this that it would be more 'democratic' because of Consider.it; quite a lovely joke indeed.

I preffer if more full node clients become available and regularly updated so I have more options to choose from, not Classic as replacement for Core.

For example I dont like the RBF feature in Core 0.12 and Im not sure even if I disable rebroadcasting double spend transactions whether Core 0.12 closes and ban connection to any client which broadcasting doublespends (RBF) because it is possible attack vector to eat my full node network bandwidth. Bitpay and such companies should for example mantain client which better fits their business future and remove the RBF functionality completly - I would appreciate such client. Miners should preffer onchain scaling over offchain scaling because they wont get any of offchain fees. And so on...

So more clients available to choose from = better decentralization of Bitcoin development.