By
several you mean one? This has no relevance to my post, and you're just trying to fruitlessly defend your losing argument. An on-chain soft fork != 2nd layer solution.
So all this cunning plotting and scheming that goes behind the backdoors is what worries me. The block is not a lab rat to try out all sorts of crazy ideas on. If we want a stable system with pre defined constants (21 m coin limit, SHA256 based mining algo, etc), then we also need to agree on one thing.
Bullshit. Nobody has to create
anything, especially not publicly.
Which is that the transaction code should not be stripped away.
You do realize that by putting the blockchain data on a 2nd layer, you are essentially creating a centralized database.
Why are you talking about a random proposal that just appeared recently, when I was not even defending/arguing said proposal? You're becoming a bigger waste of time than franky. It is clearly obvious that these kinds of discussions are way above your knowledge and current comprehension.
So why are you still here trolling? Leave Bitcoin, as per your threat, or stop being a vacuous drama queen (yet more justification not to take your words seriously)
Exactly, either users need to admit when wrong (I've done it often, no big deal) or they need to go away,