Quote from: Lauda on February 11, 2016, 06:47:10 PM

Quote from: chennan on February 11, 2016, 06:39:19 PM

I've seen that scenario being used a lot, and how I see it is that this isn't the case... Certain issues that need to be fixed can be fixed in a number of different ways, and depending on the situation could call for different tactics to solve it.

1. There is no issue at hand; 2. There is no "fix" from Classic; 3. There is no plan of action from Classic aside from 'copy-paste the works of Core'. What "ways" are you exactly talking about?

1. Really? No issue at all to speak of? ; 2. Agree to disagree ; 3. If you are saying that 1 & 2 are true, then why would there be a need for a "copy-paste" from Core... What exactly are you talking about? If there is no issue at hand, then there wouldn't be a "debate" at all... Huh

There is most certainly a debate.

Quote from: Lauda on February 11, 2016, 06:47:10 PM

Quote from: chennan on February 11, 2016, 06:39:19 PM

Fact of the matter is that there are multiple ways to reach a solution for any problem... I just feel that having this "Satoshi round table" isn't the right way to go about things for this specific problem. So again... agree to disagree.

The block size debate has been discussed for years. "Satoshi round table" isn't making any decisions, they have just voiced their opinion. What are you talking about?

Look, I know this has been discussed for a while... and from what I'm gathering is that you are in support to allow this "round table" to be the only ones who have their voices heard, and to have this "round table" be the only ones to fix and build "the spaceship going to the moon" that you have quoted before, comparing them to the "well informed engineers" and us to "tax payers".