Quote from: Amph on March 24, 2017, 01:56:25 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 24, 2017, 10:56:42 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 10:50:50 AM

For one thing, a seeming majority of users wanted bigger blocks a long time ago

No they haven't.

Users were given the opportunity to support the XT and Classic blocksize forks. And users didn't want that, both were rejected by users.

Creating an echo chamber of sock puppets is not a real majority, jonald

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 24, 2017, 10:50:50 AM

Miners are not trying to destroy Bitcoin, they are trying to scale it.
My opinion.

Your opinion is wrong, and so is that of the bigger blocks miners.

If transaction rate increases 1:1 with blocksize increases, that's not scaling by definition. You cannot refute this, because it's an unimpeachable fact

isn't that true with any method you want to implement for scaling? otherwise how do you "scale" by your definition

It is certainly not true

With off-chain transactions you can scale up transactions indefinitely (basically, up to a point where the transaction processing capacity is limited only by the sheer network bandwidth of the processing node). Even with strictly on-chain transactions, you can make them more efficient overall by packing more transactions in the block of the same size. I think there are a number of ways of scaling up with ratios higher than 1 to 1 (e.g. you could use some packing algorithm for big transactions or something to that tune)