Quote from: pooya87 on Today at 05:38:19 AM

Quote from: Room101 on May 24, 2020, 03:21:44 PM

I opposed segwit2x and BCH because I oppose everything they stand for, and I prefer the smallest block size possible because the smaller the better if second layer solutions are available.

to me it seems like your opposition is the mob mentality that @Cøbra pointed out in the end, and not with reasonable research. the funny thing is that bcash used the same mob approach to exist.
not to mention that you are confusing different things. you put an altcoin that was maliciously created without respecting consensus and majority's vote/support with the proposals in same category. you can't oppose a proposal just because you don't like the person that supports that proposal or the altcoin result. same way bcashers can't oppose SegWit just because they don't like blockstream.

for instance the only way you can oppose a proposal like SegWit2x is if you have any technical reasons why a hard fork to increase the base block size to 2 MB (weight to 8 MB) is bad while weighing both pros and cons of it.

I'm not sure what you are arguing here? My reasons for opposing segwit2x was not technical, aside from the inherent risks in any hardfork, the proposed implementation was fine by me. My opposition was to the process. At the time Segwit2x was announced as an agreement without even releasing any technical information about it all, it was just, "a bunch of us got together in a room and decided what is going to happen". Which is the same reason I hate bcash, it's centralised control. It was made as though the community had no say, like we didn't matter. Miners and corporations had decided how things will go, which is bullshit. You speak like segwit2x was a proposal, when it wasn't, it was presented as a fait accompli