Quote from: squatter on December 18, 2018, 01:39:43 AM

Housing developers either answer to the market or they go bankrupt. The same goes for Bitcoin developers: If users don't want to run their code, they become irrelevant. (See: Bitcoin XT, Classic, Unlimited)

your using the consensus as designed 2009-2013 to explain xt, classic, unlimited... and how core didnt get the vote early on

Quote from: squatter on December 17, 2018, 09:25:50 AM

The developers clearly don't have power or authority over anything.
That's why Segwit wasn't activated for so long --

but you again seem to want to pretend the non consensus mandated august 1st 2017 bypass (dev state buzzword bilateral split) ever occured.
kind of funny because "dev state" were and still are proud that it occured

the fact that you admit in another post that core didnt get segwit in using the 2009-2013 consensus (the november 2016-spring 2017) shows it wasnt high majority. it only had 35% vote.

Quote from: squatter on December 18, 2018, 01:39:43 AM

There are alternative implementations. People are free to run them or to code their own. The fact that the vast majority of users choose to run Core instead speaks volumes about what the market wants.

those that did run other nodes that are not compatible. were rlegated off network, diluting out the 65% objections. or relegated them as non voter 'compatible' (downstream/filtered/not full node/stripped)
purely to fake a 95% loyalty

thats why the mandated contentious events happened at the defined and mandated date of august 2017. because core didnt like their 35% vote, but didnt want to renegotiate/compromise back to a 2015 empty promise that the community would have accepted.

yep if core actually went with the 2015 consensus agreement they would have actually got segwit activated by christmas 2016 without contention(well, with the least contention)
.....
as for the market. dcg is the market. look at all the exchanges they OWN... remember the NYA agreement.. yes that... their involvement activated segwit with a fake promise that looks like the 2015 agreement. but backpeddled out of the 2x part, once 1x was activated. along with the UASF threats made by samson mow(dcg.co paid via BTCC) and luke JR(dcg.co paid via Blockstream). along with the fake offering of objectors with the bch(dcg.co paid via blockchain.info)