Quote from: jbreher on May 26, 2016, 03:00:01 PM

For a fully validating node, the resource demands are accordingly higher for The SegWit Omnibus Changeset than a simple bump of maxblocksize.

For a network, Segwit brings a lot of benefits while a block size increase brings none (if we exclude the TPS increase which is present in both). There isn't much to discuss here.

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 26, 2016, 04:31:39 PM

make TX fees unpredictable and in turn make TX times unreliable.

Neither one happens if you know how to properly use Bitcoin. Don't blame the network for your lack of knowledge.

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 26, 2016, 04:31:39 PM

and moving TX off chain only removes miners fees revenue, somthing we should be looking to grow...

Nonsense. When Core says that the fees are important, 'big blockists' say that it won't be necessary until the year of 20XX (there was a post in /r/btc recently, stating that it won't be important for the next 50 years or so - IIRC). Now you come back with another story? Roll Eyes

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 26, 2016, 04:31:39 PM

all the while we know 4MB or less is just fine, and won't hurt decentralization, and its more then likely that technical limit will grow as improvements are made and internet speeds grow.

No. There's even a risk at 2 MB, that's why Classic added additional limitations to the system.

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 26, 2016, 04:31:39 PM

on top of all that, there's very strong evidence that miners would not push beyond the technical limit even if there was no arbitrary limit.

There's also very strong evidence that my cat is a Jedi master.

Quote from: rizzlarolla on May 26, 2016, 06:10:30 PM

Anyone thinking of a controlled block size increase is discredited as a "Classic" losers. Case closed.

No.