Quote from: Lauda on July 03, 2016, 07:58:16 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on July 03, 2016, 02:54:55 AM

Regarding the proposal itself, I believe it is a horribly bad idea, and should obviously not get implemented.

This is a situation in which one can easily spot the toxicity of r/btc, among other things. Almost nobody supports this proposal, regardless of whether one supports Core, Classic, BU (from what I've seen), yet they had to start this outright lie that Blockstream is trying to rewrite it (which is not the case). How classic. Roll Eyes

To be entirely fair, the reason why this has not been discussed on r/bitcoin is likely because this kind of discussion would have been likely removed from r/bitcoin

Also, to be entirely fair, the blockstream core devs started proposing soft forks/BIPs that are necessary for LN to operate long before anyone had even heard of LN, and at a time at which the concept of anyone using any kind of "off chain" transaction would be generally considered to be "not using" bitcoin.

(what is clearly)The goal of the blockstream core devs is to make Bitcoin something very different from what satoshi originally meant it to be and from what it is today.

I think the people that believe that blockstream is behind this proposal believe this because they think that making "small" changes to the Bitcoin whitepaper will set a precedent that allows the whitepaper to be changed, and that the whitepaper would eventually be changed to reflect how Bitcoin operates after LN is implemented, preventing people from questioning why Bitcoin is so different from what Satoshi originally described.