Quote from: jbreher on May 28, 2016, 11:43:02 PM

Quote from: forevernoob on May 28, 2016, 11:07:12 PM

You don't seem to get it. What is most important for me is consensus and how Bitcoin is developed. 75% is not consensus.

You're right - there is something in your statements that I don't quite get. If 75% is not consensus, then neither is 95%. So... what's your point?

Well there is a difference between "consensus" and "absolute consensus". It's not just the percentages that are important. It's the way the Classic people talk and act.
They don't care about consensus. They just want bigger blocks.

Quote from: jbreher on May 28, 2016, 11:43:02 PM

Yet The SegWit Omnibus Changeset grows blocks.

Just to be clear, your argument is that increasing maxblocksize centralizes the network of non-mining, fully-validating nodes, by reducing the absolute number of such nodes, due to increased per-node resource demand?

What if the number of bitcoin users increases by by some factor due to new entrants, and a few of them fire up nodes, such that absolute node count rises while percentage drops? Is that an increase or decrease of decentralization in your definition?

Yes that is correct. It will be very hard for normal people to host nodes with huge blockchains. Just look at the Ethereum situation.
And even if the node count goes up most nodes will be hosted in data centers which is bad for decentralization.

Quote from: jbreher on May 28, 2016, 11:43:02 PM

Sure. In one sentence. I thought it was crystal clear already. So here goes - to wit: Upon activation of The SegWit Omnibus Changeset, previously fully-validating nodes are rendered non-validating nodes, as they are incapable of validating SegWit transactions.

Well they validate transactions that are non-SegWit. So they are not completely useless.