Quote from: Darkbot on April 28, 2017, 12:05:38 PM

Quote from: franky1 on April 28, 2017, 11:43:23 AM

Quote from: FiendCoin on April 28, 2017, 03:13:02 AM

No one in their right mind would be on Bitcointalk that many hours a day, saying the same shit over and over again without it being a job.

what you dont realise is that i and many others dont need to be paid.

i hold bitcoin from the earlier times.
i am not expressing my opinion to earn an income. i am doing it because i care about my hoard and future. i dont even look at the bitcoin price because even that is just temporary drama to me. i care about the long term viability of the bitcoin network as a diverse decentralised peer network, not a cludgy cesspit with a blockstream dominant tier network

my rationale about antbleed is that their firmware check server doesnt respond, and for months has not been used for anything malicious. and most pools are behind firewalls anyway. if pools were to become malicious all they would be doing is hurting themselves. directly and indirectly

secondly my rationale is that for months nothing has happened but now that segwit supporters are getting very desperate to find excuses to kill off pools to fake a 95% activationof the cludgy tier network, by purely rejecting blocks based on version number.. is a bigger threat because that is more likely to happen than all the if's and maybe's of antpool shooting themselves in their own foot using antbleed

thirdly i will emphasis the last point. shouting out a sudden 'pools are bad because they 'could' shutdown some pools, so segwit/uasf 'must' shut down some pools is hypocrisy in its finest. thats like saying there could be a nuclear war, so america must start a nuclear war.
come on think logically about the mindset of some people "omg X could kill 30% so we must kill 70%" rathre than actually listening to the 70%
its even funny that things have got so desparate that some are saying that 70% are all one man.. (illogical facepalm)

lastly. if segwit supporters want to go down the kill 70% route(which is not 1 person by th way).. this can only be done via a node consensus. then atleast use that opportunity to actually recode segwit as a 1 merkle version where there is just a single block parameter of 4mb that both native and segwit can sit in and include other features the community want and can unite everyone

not simply push out another version that has one small temporary purpose just to allow in something else that only has temporal positive features "at best" but a bigger negative, more long term issues it can and will cause.

now try to reply about my context above without just screaming any thing that amounts to 'typical shill response' or 'wrong because cant find reason but your a shill' because thats just a whistle in the wind response. P.S dont reply about me presuming your just going to scream something about shilling like your playing the victim card. again whistles in the wind.
reply about the context of the black writing not this grey writing

Why oh why i never see Franky1 in the Development & Technical Discussion section if you know so much about this topic? You're just a fake copy/paste noob try to troll people who doesn't know much about it.

Gmaxx is active there so you can have youre debat with him...Oh no you aint got the balls for it right? It's much easier to troll!

Paid shill Franky1!

I think its interesting that recently I was in the Dev&Tech section making the obvious point that SW UASF would cause a network split if not backed by majority hashpower,
and you have Gmax and Achow trolling me, playing semantic games... trying to somehow argue it. (You can't make this stuff up)