Quote from: franky1 on Today at 07:30:23 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on Today at 06:56:59 PM

Does the fact that some people would prefer to see you banned give you any pause for thought about how you conduct yourself?

if faketoshi and his altnetBSV desciples wanted me banned for calling them out. would i think im the problem. no.

So no hope for betterment, then. I suppose that was to be expected.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 07:30:23 PM

Quote from: DooMAD on Today at 06:56:59 PM

There's no such thing as a "mandatory fork" in Bitcoin.

forks happen without the need for every node user to form consensus. this is done by rejecting old style blocks to only accept new block formats. thus the only blocks that propagate are the new style. this causes old nodes still listening to old blocks to get forked off..

Translation: The stronger proposal defeated the weaker one.

If "old style blocks" were what the majority wanted, then the miners wouldn't be producing any "new style blocks" and the nodes wouldn't be propagating them.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 07:30:23 PM

you might want to check devs own wording of bip148
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki
mandatory 'activation day flag" is mentioned a few times

my favoured buzzword is not madatory. my favoured word is segregation. apartheid. .. though segregation causes some confusion so i used mandated on purpose as its the DEVs chosen words

Use whatever words you want. The fact is you still have a choice. You have made the choice to stay, because you recognise the benefits of Bitcoin's security and network effects. If you really felt that strongly about your purported moral high ground, you wouldn't have stuck around. But you know in order to stand by your beliefs, you would have to sacrifice the security and the network effects we offer you. Your alternative would be to form a weaker network. So instead, you willingly continue to support the fork you claim you hate and you can keep reaping the benefits. You complain about it, but you stay. I'd say that sounds an awful lot like a hypocrite.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 07:30:23 PM

anyway, i know yet again even after reminding you after 20 times in the last 4 years..
the june/july 2017 drama about the NYA signalling threshold which activated the bip 148 that then disregarded old blocks to fake a 100% listing of bip9 segwit blocks
i even sent you the pretty picture many times

this image is not some made up gameplay. its graph is actual references to actual flags in block data. and the flags are reference numbers used by actual bips. which actually activated feature in actual code

thus the blockchain data, node software data and github references does not lie. its all available to read

And it all shows that consensus was reached for BIP91. And yeah, the numbers don't lie. You can argue about how it happened for the rest of forever, and I'm sure you will, but it's done now.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 07:30:23 PM

as for outnumbering?

Quote from: DooMAD on Today at 06:56:59 PM

To reiterate, you want things which other users do not want. And those users outnumber you. Deny it all you like.

there are literally thousands of topics about bitcoin scaling. none of which i created, which have posts by more then thousands of different users..
yet LN (advertised as the solution) only has a couple dozen topics created by the same group of people.

You're deflecting from the real issue when you talk about topics. Topics aren't securing the network. Words are hollow. Actions are what matter. Your problem is that people are running code you don't approve of. Those are the people that outnumber you.

You're still pissing into the wind. But you're blaming me for the fact that you're covered in your own piss. I'm sure you believe that's justified in your head, though. Roll Eyes