Are you suggesting that jtoomim is not the lead maintainer? Are you playing ignorant regarding the definition of a hard fork?
I have been consistent. Please show otherwise. You've never addressed anything I've said. How have I been hypocritical? How have I been ignorant? The burden is on you to actually show how that's true -- otherwise, as usual, you're just talking shit.
You are hypocritical in that you charged me with ad-hom when you yourself personalise your arguments at one or two people in Classic.
Whether its your entire argument, a large portion or merely a constituent part is of little importance.
Its nothing to do with who the lead maintainer is, or what a HF is or is not.
You need to deal with the hurt you feel and accept that you will not see your $1100 bitcoins for the foreseeable future. Its not Gavins fault. Or jtoomim.
I called you out for that because everything you've said to me has been a personal attack or a simple mischaracterization of my words. Also, the mere mention of Gavin or jtoomim does not constitute ad hominem.
Right -- so we're supposed to ignore virtually everything that's been said, regardless of merit or substance. Never mind the discussions of: node centralization and associated security threats, the dangers and likelihood of a chain fork without miner consensus, the definition of consensus, the inexperience and lack of proven competence of the Classic dev team, the philosophical question of defining "money" and whose roadmap (or lack thereof) -- Core or Classic -- fits bitcoin's stated and practical purposes, whether Core is "corrupted" by Blockstream, the technical merits of a 2MB hardfork vs. 1MB or 1.5MB + segwit, etc.
We're supposed to ignore all this discussion (is it because the discussion has made Classic's hard fork look so unattractive?) because: "madjules007 is a bagholder." And please come correct with your endless personal attacks -- my base cost after being in bitcoin for years is $4000, not $1100. And it's super relevant to this discussion, obviously.