First of all I'd just like to say I posted this in here because I don't want it to be a technical discussion. But rather a general discussion of an impeding fork. That seems a little too important to leave in the developmental forum.
Really? Why do you asy that?
I think we should put users first. What do users want? They want low transaction fees and fast confirmations. Lets design for that case, because THE USERS are who ultimately give Bitcoin value. - Gavin Andersen
Did I completely misunderstand him when he said this is another thread? Doesn't lower transaction fees and fast confirmations mean a larger block size?
Really? Improve it how?
You seem to be saying that we should subsidize inefficient miners by limiting the block size, therefore driving up fees and making users pay for their inefficiency. - Gavin Andersen
Once again........ am I completely misunderstanding what he is saying here? He is saying limiting the block size (as it is currently ) drives up fees and makes users pay for their inefficiency. Does this not mean that Gavin is for raising the block size limit which means a fork?