Quote from: hazek on February 19, 2013, 10:56:58 AM

It's an argument over what ramifications for the security and the decentralization of Bitcoin removing the block size limit would have. Please don't spread Gavin's manipulative reframing. No one in that thread cares if less efficient miners can't "hack it", they all care what that would mean for Bitcoin. And if less efficient miners are part of what makes Bitcoin secure and decentralized then absolutely they need to be thought off when considering a hard fork type change of the protocol.

The point wasn't to spread manipulative framing. The point was to respond to notig's use of Gavin's words to claim that "It's pretty clear that the lead developers want to raise the max block size".

Notig was claiming that Gavin was arguing for a need (or desire) to increase blocksize. As I saw it, Gavin was arguing that a loss of decentralization isn't enough reason to avoid increasing blocksize. I don't see those two as being identical, do you?