Quote from: franky1 on April 29, 2019, 03:14:48 PM

blockchains and bitcoins are about progress through unity and agreement.(consensus).

Says the person who seemingly doesn't agree with a single thing happening on this chain. Roll Eyes

How is it you expect everyone to agree when you can't yourself?

The extraordinary dichotomy of a dissenter who follows a blockchain he fundamentally disagrees with.

Astounding.

Quote from: franky1 on April 29, 2019, 03:14:48 PM

typical mindset. you say 'find people that agree', which is your subtle a foolish mindset flip flop thinking that no one disagree's with cores roadmap. sorry but this very forum shows hundreds of people disliking the fee wars, transaction throughput limit and that cores roadmap is trying to deburden bitcoin while falsely advertising it as 'scaling bitcoin'.

Then they can run different code to show that they disagree. That's the entire idea, isn't it? You run the code that enforces the rules you want. But if people do run code that isn't compatible with the rules on the Bitcoin network, they might find themselves leaving the network, either by their own choice or by other users' choice. And this is what it boils down to. How is it you think you can enjoy the benefits of the security and the network effects provided by this network if you run code that has the potential to remove you from the network? You can't have it both ways. Either you agree with the transactions that are included in the next block and you're part of the network, or you disagree and suddenly you aren't part of the network anymore. Anything beyond that, you're just running your mouth. Prove your ideas are viable. Then I'll take you seriously. But you'll never prove it. So I'll never take you seriously. It's as simple as that.

People on these boards do have an unfortunate tendency to trash-talk certain forkcoins, but at least those users who forked away had a strong enough will to run code that enforced the rules they believed in, even if that meant giving up the advantages provided to them by using Bitcoin. That puts them several orders of magnitude above you in terms of the respect they're due. You just linger around like a bad smell, mouthing off about all the things you could change, but won't, because you know you'd have to do it on your own.

You know you're never going to leave this network by choice because you don't have the support you need to build a network that could even survive, let alone implement all the totalitarian crap you'd like to see. So you just sit there sniping at things you don't like but completely lack the spinal fortitude to take any real action to change them. So here you are. Business as usual. Impotent but loud. Unable to change a thing.

Quote from: franky1 on April 29, 2019, 03:14:48 PM

your mindset is also foolishly thinking that if people dont want to deburden bitcoin, those people should leave the network and make another network.

Your default position is that Bitcoin is being "deburdened". It's not realistic for you to assume that everyone feels that way about off-chain transactions. Many would be happy enough to just keep using Bitcoin as they currently do and simply not use Lightning's functionality. But yes, if you are fundamentally ideologically opposed to something you can't possibly hope to change (and it seems that you are), what the hell are you even doing here? It goes without saying that you'd be better off leaving if you can't even accept the existence of this technology which you appear to blame for denying you your precious on-chain scaling. If you believe on-chain scaling is better, why not use another chain where the users opted to focus on that? Maybe it's because it's not better. It's only better if that chain with the on-chain focus has equal security and network effects to Bitcoin. But none of them do. And they probably never will. So I'll say again, here you are. Again, business as usual. Again, impotent but loud. Again, unable to change a thing.

Quote from: franky1 on April 29, 2019, 03:14:48 PM

learn the meaning definition of consensus

What you think consensus means is observably untrue.

You tell us consensus means voting. Proven false by observable events.
You tell us consensus means everyone has to agree. Proven false by observable events.
You tell us consensus means we have to wait for features to activate to decide if we want them or not. Proven false by observable events.

Everything you have ever told us about consensus is false. All of it. Every last word. I'd tell you to learn consensus, but you could spend the rest of your life trying and you'd still never get it.