Strange way to phrase that, as if the contrary would be a (good) thing.
I definitely do not think that this rash plan would be good.
Also, this came a day(?) after that mysterious call for clarity from HaoBTC, a strong supporter of Core, almost as strong a Core supporter as BTCC.
People tend to use these things for manipulation. Nothing surprising.
The HK agreement includes something similar to this horribly risky plan, let that sink in. The idea of the posters plan was to bring the 75% activation point to 90%, those in favor of strong consensus should favor such a development.
I doubt that. The HF proposal would most likely have a high activation threshold and long grace period, making it much safer.
While I agree this seems to be largely conjecture and a wish-post on 8btc, the lack of any strong formal (or weak informal) denial was deafening. Keep in mind the context of Luke-Jr basically flicking HaoBTC off his shoulder the day prior.
People were too quick to draw to conclusions even though there have been practically no statements from any major pools so far.
Unlike here, where staff are paid to remain staunchly objective.
The views and opinions of that individuals is in no way related to their staff contributions.