Quote from: JayJuanGee on June 23, 2017, 01:58:19 AM

Quote from: franky1 on June 23, 2017, 01:16:56 AM

this week has proved one thing

89% pool agreement flagging is possible

segwit alone only got 10% in the first week and stalled around the 34% average of 6 months

2mb and segwit getting 89% in a week just goes to show all the chest beating from a particular group refusing to code 2mb was just wasting time. if only they released a 2mbsegwit in summer 2016 alot of drama could have been avoided

Your last paragraph is misleading.

The 89% is not signaling 2mb first. They are signaling segwit first, and there is some contingency regarding the 2mb aspect of it, but don't mislead with your attempt to spin what is actually being signaled.

By the way, a lot of us understand the whole ambiguity of this situation - in that some of the folks within the segwit2x are in fact wanting to argue that 2x is a given, when the only part that seems to be a given is the seg wit portion..

As already stated many times in this thread, the 2x part is contingent upon passage of time, code writing, testing and consensus.... the consensus component of the 2x, that you and some other big block nutjobs seem inclined to do, should not be assumed.

34% signalled from november2016-now for segwit first.. and 2mb at some unknown time in the future(no promise/hope)

now a new proposals has within just one week got over 89% signalling for segwit AND 2mb within 3 months of segwit.

meaning the desire for 2mb exists and the majority is happy to have it activated within 3 months.

though i agree there is a major difference between "flagging" and "handling".. meaning the 89% may flag purely to get segwit activated but only a small percentage may have the actual codebase running to cope with the 2mb part. (EG they just running core 0.14.x while false flagging for segwit2x just to get segwit active. but then backtrack during the 3 month grace of 2mb)

but thats something i highlighted in a few messages that got deleted. so it seems the only way to avoid deletion is if i word things a certain way.

Edit:
seems one of my messages didnt get deleted

Quote from: franky1 on June 22, 2017, 12:31:51 PM

now we just have to see if we can get nodes to download it (once its finalised and reviewed for RC) to then get a NODE consensus... for pools to have confidence that if they made such blocks.. the nodes wont still be running old code to reject blocks bigger than (1*1000*1000).

what people seem to forget is its not simply about waving a flag in a block.. its about consensus of nodes actually running code rules that allow bigger base blocks and consensus of pools creating bigger base blocks.

at this moment the empty sybil flag waving will just cause segwit to activate, but no guarantee of base blocks over (1*1000*1000) being accepted because from bitnodes stats, it shows no one is actually running the segwit2x (btc1) codebase to enforce it

Quote from: franky1 on June 20, 2017, 04:26:32 PM

i just wonder how many blocks are waving flags.. but not running the actual implementation that has the code. thus basically sybil flagging

Quote from: franky1 on June 18, 2017, 01:53:16 PM

real funny part is

all these bips pushing hard to "activate" segwit..

but no one will be able to actually make a segwit transaction when activated...
there will be delays and excuses of why people have to wait for blockstream to code a version which allows the segwit keypair wallet function on mainnet

so dont expect utopia on activation day.. plenty more drama after that of getting people to download yet another version after activation and then the cluster f**k of drama of getting people to move funds from legacy keypairs over to segwit keypairs