I can assure everyone there is no deal with any ASIC makers and ETN
Thanks for the interest
Did that message come straight from Ells along with a metaphorical brown envelope full of ETN?
Now you've said it and the more I think about it, there is literally no reason to allow ASICs back on so soon then other than utter incompetence and mismanagement. If you say there's no deal then it must be the other reason: that one of their partners threatened to withdraw unless they fixed the difficulty swings and rather than employ something like Zawy or LWMA, they just knee-jerked and said yes to ASICs again.
Anyway thanks for that one-liner, once again completely ignoring my other questions. I saw a few other posts about censorship and realised that I'm not going to get a straight answer from you as much as I want to believe I could.
No one is being censored
I havent requested your posts here for deletion, they havent been deleted, and Ive tried to respond the best I can.
Its ok that you dont agree with the answers
Just cause we disagree about some things doesnt mean we should be against each other, or that our points shouldnt be heard
ASIC was by FAR the right move if you look at the GPU data after the fork off cryptonight
Where did I say you had censored my posts? I said I had read about censorship but you aren't addressing the points I raised.
No, ASICs were not the answer, and as a non-miner you wouldn't understand why - a correctly adjusting difficulty algorithm would have prevented that. If they wanted to avoid all that crap they could have not just sat around for 2 months with their thumbs up their arses and done the hard fork sooner. They weren't fooling anyone, they didn't know how to do it, they copied Monero's code which is why that bug in block 202612 was also present and if you just blindly copy stuff without understanding how it works, then you end up with this - read the full story on Github. People would probably have respected them a lot more if they said, 'ok we don't understand this so please can you help us' and yes, it might have cost them some money but instead decided to try and fake it. Anyway, it's done now, and it flies in the face of a good chunk of their White Paper so might as well rip that up. The reality is that Cryptonight algorithm and Monero's source code was a bad place to start - the only reason given was for ASIC-resistance and making it available to CPU miners, both of which were correct at the time of publishing but they selected an overly complicated piece of code to base their blockchain on for the wrong reasons.
You haven't answered a good half of my questions but I will accept silence as a 'no comment'. I think this'll all come out in the wash pretty soon, this is clinging on by the skin of its teeth right now.