Show me where I said "after". That word doesn't even appear in my post. Users can disconnect other nodes at any time. If you are disconnected before your proposed rule change activates, I'll repeat again that any funds you have on the network are still safely secured and you can rejoin the network at any time by simply following consensus rules again. There is nothing incorrect about my statement. My words do not solely relate to "AFTER activation". If you can't understand that, it's your error, not mine. Every time you say "flip flop" I say you fail at comprehending plain English. That, or you're attempting to deliberately twist or distort what I'm saying. It's hard to tell with you sometimes.
mr flip flop
if core want to change the rules.. and its core nodes that disconnect opposers. then its not the opposers that need to "rejoin by following the consensus rules again" because if your trying to twist your rhetoric to be about BEFORE activation.. then no rules have changed yet thus the opposers are and would be running the same rules.. OBVIOUSLY
It shouldn't be this difficult for it to sink in. If users choose to enforce a rule that says bit 6 and bit 8 are no longer valid, that
is a change in the rules. It's immaterial if your proposed feature has or hasn't activated.
the only condition where opposers would need to change anything to "follow the rules" (as if they are not following the rules).. is if the rules have changed.. thus AFTER
so its obvious your rant was talking about AFTER because thats the only time an opposer wont be "following the rules"
Nodes began enforcing a consensus rule that meant nodes are disconnected for flagging invalid bits. If you were flagging bit 6 or bit 8, then you were in breach of the rules nodes freely chose to enforce.
...
getting to the point of before activation. WHERE RULES HAVE NOT CHANGED.
Rules did change. Users ran code to enforce the change.
No one cares what you believe the rules were.
No one cares if you think they hadn't changed when they had.
No one cares if it was before, during or after proposed features in other clients activating.
Users ran the code and it happened. But please keep achieving absolutely nothing by refusing to acknowledge events as they were, rather than how you would ideally want them to be and whining that it doesn't work how you think it should. There is no flip flop, you simply can't accept reality.