Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Bitcoin Classic developer admits it: blocksize debate is just a powegrab excuse
by
Lauda
on 25/03/2017, 07:19:53 UTC
I was already well aware of this being the case. Now he has finally, publicly, admitted to it. Zander, Peter R, Ver, et. al, don't really give a damn about the user experience. They don't care whether the mempool is full or not. Those are just lies that were fed to people to subversively attempt to gain control of Bitcoin. If BTU was supported by the economy (which it isn't) and became the *main* implementation, in a combination with the mining cartel from Jihan, could practically enable them to do whatever it is they wanted to do.

This is a war that nobody can win, so don't fight it. Hard fork should yield to SW, because otherwise no progress can be made. Once SW is in place and block is full again, push for hard fork and Core has to follow suit because SW is no longer an option. Decentralization determines that things can only be done one at a time. Right now both SW and hard fork are doing at the same time, and no progress can be made. One has to wait and yield to the other.
This is already likely going to happen. See this: BIP 148 UASF Segwit
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki