The majority (Core) wants to make the BU fork.... Makes sence
here is the blockstream CTO demanding non-core implementations split. and him proving they dont want to. the same blockstream CTO also thinks splits are good
What you are describing is what
I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral by requiring the sign bit be set in the version in their blocks (existing nodes require it to be unset).
Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.The ethereum hardfork was bilateral, probably the only thing they did right--
here is a blockstream defender with no clue about how bitcoin works, or knows the term consensus. sounding desparate to try getting non-core nodes to split.
So hurry the fuck up and get your fork over with, the constant droning of your lies is not worrying or irritating, it's just boring.
No-one's interested, DO YOUR FORK. You've got the hashrate, do your fork.
and now lets get back to the blockstream paid core devs.. they are are only 'team' that bypassed real hard consensus to give miners the power.. no other team have done this.
only blockstream paid devs decided giving miners ultimate power was good.by going soft. yet they cry like they are the victims