Quote from: franky1 on February 07, 2019, 01:09:23 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on February 07, 2019, 12:15:22 AM

And don't forget the part where the /btc1 devs pulled the plug in November 2017. It's kinda hard for forks to gain adoption if the devs abandon them completely.

need you forget the 2x was dropped in august.. even though the activation wasnt due until atleast november.

Learn to read, FFS. If I am certain I don't approve of a feature being proposed in an alternative client, I am under no obligation to remain connected to the clients proposing that feature (particularly if remaining connected to them could result in replay attacks).

How many more times do you need this explained before it is finally absorbed through your dense cranium? The date on which features are due to activate is immaterial. If users do not want clients with incompatible proposals connecting to them, there is absolutely nothing you can do about that. They don't have to wait for a feature to activate in order to disconnect the client proposing it. What is it with your arbitrary fixation with dates? No one cares. It's literally irrelevant. Doesn't matter in the slightest.

Quote from: franky1 on February 07, 2019, 01:09:23 AM

in a different topic u provided the link and you were very loudly proud of their attempts to kill off 2x

Quote from: DooMAD on February 04, 2019, 12:32:46 PM

Pretty sure I just said I'm not denying that incompatible nodes were disconnected. Here's the rationale for it.
....
I agreed with it then and I agree with it now.

mmhmm.. u agreed that nodes should be disconnected 3 months BEFORE an activation of those nodes bips
mmhmm.. u agreed that nodes should disconnect BTC1 (Segwit2x) nodes 3 months before segwit2x activates

anyway. im done trying to translate ur flip flops. might be worth u doing some research on what bitcoin is all about and how bitcoin was invented to stay away from needing a "core"
and then maybe finally you can decide if ur a flip or a flop. and atleast stick with one narrative

There is no flip flop. You are just incapable of understanding what is being explained to you, because you are under the entirely mistaken impression that consensus means only alternative clients can initiate a fork by activating new features. That belief is not correct. The other option, which apparently needs to be explained to you a billion times over, is that users can enforce rules that disconnect alternative clients. To reiterate, clients following current consensus rules can introduce new rules that effectively fork other clients off the network. That's entirely their prerogative. Not your call. Your obsession with dates is as meaningless as the utter drivel you spout in every topic you derail. Kindly get a clue.