Quote from: infofront on June 16, 2018, 07:43:41 PM

Quote from: jbreher on June 16, 2018, 04:15:08 PM

Geeze, JJG - you need to look up the definition of 'fungible'. Within the three posts preceding yours, 2/3 of them stated that they were cautious of accepting Segwit transactions until they gained some confidence in it. That is definitively a lack of fungibility. A lack of fungibility is in no way limited to some sort of centralized blacklisting.

If the miners are as trustworthy as you big blockers think, then it shouldn't even be an issue.

Mining is orthogonal. We have evidence in this thread of users not wanting to accept Segwit transactions. That's users not miners, that's a lack of fungibility, and that's an issue.

Quote

Quote from: jbreher on June 16, 2018, 04:28:07 PM

Quote from: BobLawblaw on June 16, 2018, 02:18:41 PM

Might have some relevance.

Were it not for DOGE's legacy as a joke coin, and its infinite emission schedule.

I'm not a mathematician, but doesn't that make bcash at least 3X more of a joke coin?

No. That's just a silly sensationalist tweet. While DOGE may have more transactions, BCH transfers far more value.